Kant and the Categorical Imperative Essay
Kant and the Categorical Imperative
Kant tried to develop a theory of ethics which relied on reason rather than emotion. While he was not anti–religious, he wanted an ethical system which
was not clouded by religion, emotion or personal interpretation. He placed emphasis on motives behind an action rather than, like the Utilitarians, the
consequences of an action. He believed that consequences were no guide to whether an action was moral or not. His theory is known as deontological,
or duty–based, where ends can never justify the means.He believed that there were general rules which must be adhered to in every circumstance. He
called these absolute rules of what is good or bad 'Categorical...show more content...
For example, to tell your sister that she looks good in a dress – which does not in fact suit her – just to make her feel better about herself, would be
lying, however good the motive behind it. Not lying, to Kant, is an absolute imperative and he uses a priori reasoning to come to this conclusion.
These moral rules are as reliable as mathematical proofs because they derive from first principles.
Only free agents (people thinking for themselves and making their own decisions) can make moral decisions. There must be an element of choice – the
choice to do good or bad. He assumed that we are all free agents. An action can only possess moral value when it is done for is own sake, for duty's
sake, and not for the pleasure of the individual or in the hope of gaining specific outcomes.
(Part B): Taken at face value, one could argue that "Categorical Imperatives allow no room for compassion in the treatment of women wanting
abortions." This is because categorical imperatives are absolute rules which cannot be altered to suit an individual. To Kant, murder is always wrong
and this would be the categorical imperative. Kant would have to be persuaded that this categorical imperative cannot be said to cover every abortion.
If it could be argued that a human life does not begin at the moment of conception but, say, after 8 weeks, the categorical imperative could be said not to
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Kant's Categorical Formulations
Formulations 1 and 2 from Kant's 'categorical imperative' refer to actions to need be universalised and treating people as ends, rather than means
to ends. Formulation 3 states; everything you do or and every action you commit , you must picture yourself as a person writing the law for a new
kingdom, in which everybody must treat everybody else as ends, rather than means. You can't therefore make a law hypocritically, such as 'I'm
going to lie but just this once and other people shouldn't lie and I won't lie again'. You also cannot also establish a law in your ' new kingdom' that
applies to everyone else but yourself, such as 'I can lie because everybody lies' the lies you tell therefore making people around you means to an end as
the rule

Kant's Deontology
1.0 Understanding Ethics
We think we know the difference between right and wrong, don't we? Where the idea of right and wrong comes from is a question that stems from a
branch of philosophy known as ethics. Ethics can be really hard to define, since what we think is right, or ethical, might be very different from what
our friends or family members think.
However, ethics can be loosely defined as the part of philosophy that deals with good and evil. Ethics tries to answer questions like:
пЃ¶What actions are good? What actions are evil?
пЃ¶How can we tell the difference?
пЃ¶Are good and evil the same?
пЃ¶How should we make hard decisions that might help or hurt other people?
пЃ¶How do our actions affect others? The problem is, everyone's...show more content...
People were beginning to rely on the principles of natural law, which states that there is a right and a wrong and that we must use reason, or our
personal sense of logic, to figure out the difference. During this time, a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant developed a branch of ethics that
was solely based upon one's sense of duty to act in the way we see as right. Kant's deontology is guided by an individual's own personal sense of
morality, or what is right and what is wrong to us.
Kant's deontology, sometimes called deontological ethics, starts by acknowledging that actions and their outcomes are independent things. Basically,
there are things you have to do, even though you know they are wrong, such as shooting that intruder to protect your family. According to deontology,
you need to focus on the act, such as protecting your family, and not the likely death it will mean for the intruder.
4.0 Teleology vs. Deontology
Teleological ethics is based on a desirable end. The word 'teleology' comes from the word 'telos' in Greek which means outcome or

Kant And Respect
Kant did not simply certify that persons are qualified for respect; he gave an involved conflict for that conclusion. Persons ought to be respected in
light of the way that persons have pride. Laborers have a respectability that machines and capital don't have (Beauchamp, Bowie, N. E., and Arnold, D.
G, 2004). In this light, multi–national organizations ought to protect the prosperity of every one of its specialists everywhere throughout the world and
guarantee that the work and wage directions are being taken after. Completing social activity to ensure the prosperity of some person whose rights are
being damaged is similarly right and in this way ought not be seen as method for upsetting the

Analysing The Supreme Principle Of Morality
Analysing the Supreme Principle of Morality
In Immanuel Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, he aims to identify and establish "the supreme principle of morality" (4:392). In other
words, his work sets out to demonstrate the function of what Kant calls the "Categorical imperative". The purpose of this essay is to first explain the
conception of Kant's Categorical imperative. It will then discuss the application of this within his Universal Law formulation, as well as within the
formula of Humanity. Finally, it will investigate and critique the inconsistency of Kant's Categorical imperative theory.
Before one can discuss how the Categorical imperative works in its main formulations, it is important to understand the basis of what it is. To open,
Kant explains that morality can be addressed as an imperative–this is a proposition which declares an action to be obligatory. There are, however, two
types of imperatives underlined in the work, but only one which deals with morality.
(1)Hypothetical imperative
(2)Categorical imperative
(1) is a command that deals with if an individual's desire to attain a certain end. For example, if you want to acquire knowledge, then you must learn.
This imperative can always be posed in the form of "if you want (x), then you must do (y)". However, hypothetical imperatives are not moral
commands because it is concerned purely with personal desire, and lacks necessity. On the other hand, (2) is not dependent on subjective desire.

Examples Of The Categorical Imperative
Immanuel Kant's moral philosophy is mostly remembered for its central thesis, the Categorical Imperative. According to Kant, rational beings
experience the moral law as a categorical imperative. The Categorical imperative commands universally and unconditionally, from which all duties are
derived. Kant articulates the categorical imperative through several formulations. The most prominent formulations of the Categorical Imperative are
known as the Formula of Universal Law (C1), the humanity formulation of categorical imperative (C2) and the kingdom formulation of categorical
imperative (C3). The general thought of C1 is to demand that one act only on the basis of maxims that one can will as universal laws. The second
formulation commands respect...show more content...
For instance, non–formalists read Kant as departing from formalism due to C2, given Kant's expression that there must be ''something the existence
of which in itself has an absolute worth.'' (Gr 82). By a process of elimination, that something must be persons by virtue of their capacity for rational
agency; the absolute worth of persons or rational agents comprises an independent order of value which grounds the moral law. On the other hand,
Kant is read as a moral formalist due to C1 and C3. In the first case, Kant is understood as saying that there is a procedure for testing maxims to
determine their universality thereby con–structing rational maxims. Alternatively, according to C3, Kant is understood as saying that the stance of the
members of an ideal kingdom of ends defines what is right. This view holds that ''morality consists, then, in the reference of all action to the law
giving by which alone a kingdom of ends is possible'' (Gr 4:435). However, such a kingdom is ''admittedly only an ideal'' (Gr 83/4:433). The
members of such a merely ideal realm would construct the laws for themselves that ultimately bind all of us. For example, ideal legislators pass ideal
laws that impose moral behavior. However, the content of the moral law itself is not implicitly

Categorical Imperative Essay
Having argued for the view that hypothetical imperatives are wrong, I now wish to consider rival views. The other imperative that Kant talks
about is the categorical imperative; wish is known to be the right one. "Categorical, or unqualified, imperatives are the right kind of imperatives,
because they show proper recognition of the imperial status of moral obligation" (pg. 128). Kant named it, categorical imperatives (CI), which
according to Kant is a strategy for control of morality in any course of movement. The CI consists of a couple steps that I will explain below: First
step is to find a maxim, which is also known to be the general rule. Meaning, say you were in the spirit to help someone who was in need. The
maxim would be to help the person, but to have no load of weight on your shoulders by helping them. The second step consists to see if the maxim
affects everyone. If the steps can be made available, then we obtain the maxim, and it is considered to be moral. If they are not...show more content...
129). The core of this concoction of the CI is the desire of a rebuttal, in which has been debated in what Kant had in mind. The first law is logical
contradiction, where the given movement would clearly be unimaginable. Secondly, Kant might have meant it to be teleological contradiction.
Teleological contradiction is where the top most couldn't be able to work in a functioning manner lawfully in a well–regulated system of nature. The
third one Kant mentioned was the practical contradiction, where my activity wouldn't be affective in trying to achieve motivation, if everyone wanted
to use if for that same purpose. "Kant illustrates how the CI principle of the law of nature works by applying it to each of these maxims" (pg.130).
Not only does Kant talk about the principles of nature and the CI, but he also explains what a lying promise

Kant's Categorical Argument Essay
Kant's Categorical Argument
Emanuel Kant was a German Philosopher who lived in the late 18th century and was arguably one of the greatest thinkers of all time. He came up
with a guide to morals in direct opposition to the ontological theory. Many people use his ethics as a guide to living a moral life.
The topic I shall be discussing is Kant's categorical imperative and the utilitarian's greatest happiness idea. There are significant problems with both
ideas. It is apparent however, that alternatives to these two conflicting schools of thought have been offered. One popular criticism of utilitarianism is
that it deals too much with the consequences of one's actions, and the same for Kant except...show more content...
When we act, whether or not we achieve what we intend with our action is often beyond our control and the morality of our actions cannot depend on
their outcome. What we can control however is the will behind these actions. That is we can will to act according to one law rather than another. The
morality of an action therefore, must be assessed in terms of the motivation behind it and not the consequences associated with it. According to Kant
the only thing that is good without reason is the good will. A good will is good in itself, not just for what it produces.
Courage, health, and wealth can all be used for the wrong purposes Kant argues, and therefore cannot be "intrinsically" good. Happiness is not
intrinsically good because even being worth of happiness Kant says, requires that one possess a good will. The good will is the only unconditional good.
Goodness cannot come from acting on impulse. It can only come from doing an action in a certain way. We might be tempted to think that some
movements that make actions good and have a positive goal –to make people happy – are then moral. But this is not so Kant says if the act is not done
with the right motive.

Kant's Controversy
An Individual's autonomy can be altered or swayed by many different life circumstances, stages of human life, religion or faith and its many practices
as well as mental capacity and comprehension. In regards to my own understanding towards the required reading it gives many compare and contrast
between similar yet controversial topics one being of faith and religion another being that of an individual that is experiencing the manic phase of
bipolar disorder. Compared to one of Jehovah's Witness' whom is making a decision based on a scriptural doctrine. The examples and practices of
these two opposite and controversial topics have absolutely nothing to do with each other, however, I understand how an individual uneducated about
the faith can be baffled.
Kants' belief system appears as very logical in the sense we cannot have a full understanding of information we are essentially unaware of due to the
fact that knowledge doesn't absorb into our consciousness from osmosis. The mind is a very powerful muscle and is capable of...show more content...
One of Jehovah's Witness refusing the transmission of blood based on scriptural doctrine to abstain from blood not due to being bipolar experiencing
a manic episode is a conscious matter not a chemically induced one. To also note the Kantian theory is the idea of a higher moral principle of what is
truly right and wrong. Intriguingly enough ones moral compass or belief system can be retailored due to life circumstances. That another individual
cannot give their own experiences too because they have not lived for the original person. Therefore, as long as what someone does isn't harming
another human being and is not inhuman to themselves why should any outside party attempt to alter the decision of an

Kant's Ethical Dilemma Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Deontology theories are used to approach the ethical dilemmas that continually challenge decision–makers, aiming to reach a reasoned, rational, and
logical justification at the moment of taking the decision that bear in mind the stakeholders' interests.
The paper will demonstrate the Kantian Deontology theory as a driver to rationalize decision in an ethical dilemma.
DILEMMA
The personal dilemma I faced concerned reaching a decision that conflicted with my obligation and duty as a manager and embracing the
benevolence as a human being. During my career, I was holding the position of IT team leader for 8 in a hectic port operation, which necessitates 24
/7 IT support. We were one good family. One day I received a call from one of the team members saying that he received a job opportunity. Further, he
is...show more content...
Surprisingly, He requested my support to return to his position. I was utterly shocked by his demand after the way he resigned, I refused his request
fearing of encouraging the team to follow the same attitude, besides, the team commented on his unethical behaviour.
THEORY
Kant's ethics formulation is based on categorical imperatives (CI) that bind us to fulfil our duty regardless of our desires, circumstances, and even
interests. These imperatives are based on reasons or motives to act benevolently. Decision–makers have an obligation to sue rational decisions by virtue
of being rational agents. CI tackle universalizability, humanity as an end in itself, the formula of autonomy, and the Kingdom of Ends. Merely, an
action must pass the three imperatives to be taken, and people are acting purely morally based on rational will in lieu external influences.
As per Kant, Ellington and Kant (1993), The CI three variations are:–
1–"Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal

This principle is referred to as Kant's practical imperative and is an important principle for an ethical system which says that each human being is an
end in himself or herself. No human being should be thought of or used merely as a means for someone else end. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand the main
protagonist of "The Insider" portrays himself to be a conflicted individual as he makes decisions throughout the movie. Against an undetermined future,
he ruminates about what he knows is right for example, receiving threats, the phone ringing at odd hours. He makes most of his decisions by weighing
the cost and benefits, which may be referred to as Kant's principle the "end justifies the means".Analysis of Wigand if he had to disclose the information
...show more content...
The Kantian perspective would consider Lowell actions to be unethical, as he encourage another person to break his promise for a greater of social
good. Lowell knows the extent of the pleasure, but not the pain. The benefits of his encouragement would uphold the honor of 60 minutes and CBS
news, protecting the public against harm. The disadvantages and the cost would result in Wigand and his family losing all benefits from the agreement.
The possible lawsuit faced against CBS and damages to the tobacco industry and its employees. If he does not encourage Wigand, its just result in vice
versa, he would receive the benefits and the tobacco industry and employees are protected. It would costs harm to public if they do not know the truth.
In conclusion it can be seen that both Wigand and Bergman used each other as means to one anothers end.
Not actually being in his position it would be difficult to decide to what my actual emotions would be, based on the fact that I would be putting my
family in danger to protect the public. I would have probably done the same as it would be my moral obligation and the right thing to do. Kant's
duty–based ethics says that some acts are wrong or right because of the things or situations that are related and people have a duty to act in
accordance, regardless of the good or bad consequences that may be produced.
Dr. Wigand decision is an example of goodwill as he disregarded the concern of consequences of his and his

Why Is Motivation So Imperative? Essay
When you wake up in the morning, what is the passion that fuels you to make today special? The triggers that motivate employees are completely
different for everyone. Many people are motivated by fame, money, cars, clothing, etc. Regardless of what may motivate people, motivation must be
balanced throughout the workplace (Forbes). Keeping employees motivated is a crucial element in order to retain the best employees in the company.
Why is motivation so imperative in the workplace? There are numerous reasons why companies should have a motivated workforce. Motivated
employees will not only work quicker, but they will also use creativity to help the organization save millions of dollars by implementing new ideas. For
many years, motivation has been studied in depth. Tests such as the Myers–Briggs to determine the personality type that an employee has. These
particular test can be very helpful, the main factors that motivate employees to achieve change as they mature and begin to understand what matter
the most in their personal lives. Motivation plays a key role in developing leaders in the workplace (Forbes). In order to develop leaders in the
workplace, managers must lead by example. If upper management shows excitement towards meeting new goals and increasing productivity in the
company, everyone will be on the same page and will play their role on the team.
Meanwhile, there are two different types of motivation, intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is motivation

What Is Kant's Categorical Imperative
In order to evaluate whether one's actions are moral, we use many moral dilemmas. One of them is Kant's categorical imperative. This essay presents
Kant's project of categorical imperative. Then, I will explain that rulers should appeal to Kant's categorical imperative when making foreign policy
decision. In order to support my point of view, I will give importance to the reasons of why rulers appeal to categorical imperative when making foreign
policy, so I have two reasons for this. One of them is that states depend on each other in economically and politically. Thus, in order to provide this
stability which means that continue to stay among other states, states should act through the principles of categorical imperative which are...show more
content...
In order to explain the first reason of why rulers should appeal to categorical imperative when making foreign policy decisions, we can think about
the growing trade between the states. States become more interdependent when trades among various states expand. Interdependence is not only
important economically but also politically because all economic or business activity depends on political positions of the states. When states trade
between each other, they become mutually dependent on each other's political advantages. Also, world markets are influenced by politics and state's
power in the world markets depends on its foreign policy. So, states should establish good relations with other states. For this reason, when making
foreign policy decisions, ruler should appeal to categorical imperative. Firstly, rulers' actions must be universally valid. If state's foreign decisions are
internally valid, then state cannot benefit from this politically and economically. For example, if the state decide to change the price of its export
goods up without approval of other states, then states could not sell its goods whose price increase, because other states want to buy the same goods
from another country whose price is cheaper. Second point is that if state's intention is bad and this kind of intention is understood by other states, this
state is reproached by other states, which have a relation with this state. As a result of

Example Of Imperative Logic
A dilemma has been raised by Gorgen Gorgensen pertinent to the possibility of imperative logic. Imperative sentence such as 'shut the door' is neither
true nor false. It makes no sense to ask of an imperative sentence whether it is true or false, they are not truth–apt. Hence imperatives can be considered
neither premises nor conclusions of an argument. But, despite this fact, we can construct imperative argument. These two reverse conditions pose a
dilemma as Gorgensen puts it 'So we have the following puzzle: According to a generally accepted definition of logical inference only sentences
which are capable of true or false can function as premises or conclusion in an inference, nevertheless it seems evident that a conclusion in the
imperative mood may be drawn from two premises one of which or both of which are in the imperative mood. How is this puzzle to be dealt
with?'(Gorgensen: 1938: 289) The dilemma here is between the followings: (C1) validity requires the premises and conclusion of an argument must be
truth–apt, that is there are no valid arguments containing imperatives, and (C2) there are valid arguments containing imperatives. Let us...show more
content...
E.g. 'The house is on fire' becomes 'Fire', and without losing its functional quality of being true or false...A command is here regarded as simply the
more serious ellipsis of omitting the entire penalty clause of the described class of disjunctions, again without sacrificing the truth rules of a
disjunction which, however, remain clear, of course, only if the penalty is understood. 'Run', then, is permitted to be considered true if the exhorted
one stays and burns, where the indicative 'you run' would be false." (Bohnert: 1945: 303) Hare admits that his endeavor is a good one to reduce
imperatives into indicatives. But this reduction is limited to only simple imperative word like 'run' or simple imperative sentence like 'go

Jeff Bezos the CEO and founder of Amazon has a unique work ethic, and one he demands his employees uphold as well. He believe in the
conventional ideals of hard work and dedication, but to him they take on a whole new meaning. However, according to Jodi Kantor and David
Streitfeld; Bezos is seeing just how far he can push white collars workers before they break. Looking through the lens of Immanuel Kant's respect for
person ideology I will evaluate the morality of what Amazon is doing to its workers.
In the article "Respecting the humanity in a person" Bowie brings up Kant's argument about treating people with respect and dignity. Kant says "Act
so that you treat humanity whether, in your own person or in that of another, always as an end never as a means only." By saying this he is
encouraging people to be thoughtful and considerate of others no matter the setting in which you find yourself and them in. Because people are
self–governing, reasonable, autonomous beings; people are worthy of respect. In this paper while addressing most of the points this statement makes, I
will be focusing most prominently on the last part of Kant's quote; "Always as an end, never merely as a means only".
The reason Bezos is coming under fire in the New York Times...show more content...
If they hadn't Amazon would be out of workers by now. Secondly, because we cannot go on a case by case basis for the thousands of employees that
Amazon has; we are going to assume none of them were coerced. The United States has many other opportunities available for those well qualified.
Furthermore, Amazon only accepts those it deems highly qualified; therefore, for the purpose of this paper we will assume that no employee was
coerced. Indeed former employees in the article admit to having other opportunities career wise, but selected Amazon because they "internalized
Amazon's principals" (pg.

The Groundwork takes up a big question: What is the supreme principle of morality? (Michael J. Sandel, 2009). Besides this question, I am going to
consider the following questions: What is the categorical imperative? The difference between categorical and hypothetical imperatives. What is
morality from Kant's point of view? And of course, the main question of this essay – Will the categorical imperative apply to all kinds of moral
problems?
In the Groundwork Kant criticized utilitarianism: morality is not about maximizing happiness or any other end, it is about respecting persons as ends
in themselves (Michael J. Sandel, 2009). Kant connects justice and morality to freedom. He rejects utilitarianism. According to Kant utilitarianism
leaves rights vulnerable. Kant emphasizes, I also agree...show more content...
Sandel, 2009).
To define "freedom" Kant contrasts two notions: autonomy and heteronomy. To act autonomously is to act according to law I give myself– not
according to the dictates of nature or social convention. To act heteronomously is to act according to determinations given outside of me. We can talk
about moral responsibility if there is an autonomous act.
According to Kant, the moral worth of an action consists not in the consequences that flow from it, but in the intention from which the act is done. The
motive that confers moral worth on an action is the motive of duty. Motive of duty means doing the right thing for the right reason. Only actions done
out of the motive of duty have moral worth.
Categorical imperative is the notion in Kant's moral philosophy which can be defined as the highest principle of morality. The notion of categorical
imperative was introduced by Kant in his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and had been studied in detail in his Critique of Practical

Kant 's First Categorical Imperative
I will not use a person 's information for my own profit without his consent. (1) According to Kant's first categorical imperative, the formula of the
universal law, "Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." (Korsgaard) (2) Kant
stated that people should act from the maxim or their own personal rule. (3) Therefore, under the rule, using a person's information for profit without
his consent is an irrational action, so it is unethical. (4) According to Kant's second categorical imperative, the formula of the end in itself, "Act in
such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the
same time as an end". (Birsch 6) (5) Kant states that all people are autonomous and it is irrational and wrong if someone use a person as a tool to
accomplish his goal. (6) A person is not a lifeless tool and should not be used without his consent, ever and everyone must be free to choose assist other
person not. Therefore, under the Kant's first and second categorical imperative, it is unethical to use a person's information for profit without his
consent. I also believe it is fine to attack the terrorist's account and crack their encrypted information. In Act Utilitarianism Theory, there are four factors
will involve the evaluation: extent, intensity, duration, and certainty. (1) According to Bentham's ethical theory, Act Utilitarianism,

Categorical Imperatives
Immanuel Kant's goal was to ground morality in human reason rather than another source. Kant believed that through reason we can find a supreme
moral principle. This foundational principle is from what morality grows. Diving deeper Kant explains that morality is about fulfilling one's duties.
Thus meaning a person's intentions makes an action moral, immoral or amoral. These actions are split into three types of actions
1.) Contrary to duty(immoral)
2.) In accordance with duty for some other reason(Amoral)
Fear of punishment
Ulterior motive
3.) Action done from duty(Moral)
Our duty comes from either perfect duty or imperfect duty. Perfect duty is negatively worded almost always asking to refrain from a certain action
that is always obeyed. Imperfect duty is positively worded where we choose when and where the duty applies because the duty requires action on our
part. Duties then lead to imperatives which are commands. There are two types of imperatives:...show more content...
For example if one wants to play the piano well then one should practice.
Categorical Imperatives which are moral commands that must be followed no matter what and are derived from reason. For example, do not kill.
What Kant is looking for is a supreme moral principle otherwise know as The categorical imperative which holds within it categorical imperatives. So
in order to know if something is moral we can understand categorical imperatives through 4 formulations which are:
Humanity: Never act in such a way that we treat humanity, whether in ourselves or in others, as a mere means
Autonomy: Act through your maxims you could be a legislator of universal laws.
Kingdom of ends: "act in accordance with the maxims of a member giving universal laws for a merely possible kingdom of ends"(Johnson, Kant's
Moral

Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative
Immanuel Kant Categorical Imperative Essay
I.Introduction
My name is Diamante Sullivan and today I will be dissecting Immanuel Kant's Categorical imperative, and explaining what it is to act from a good
will. I will also explain the differences between the categorical imperative, and the hypothetical imperative. I will do this in order to execute a reasoned
and justified critique of Immanuel Kant's ideas and also illustrate alternative philosophical arguments.
II. Synopsis of the categorical Imperative
Immanuel Kant a philosopher who lived in the 17th– 18th century, created a standard to which we as rational beings should live by known as the
categorical imperative. The categorical imperative is a stringent set of guidelines to which we must operate by in order to...show more content...
Immanuel Kant was stringent in his philosophical beliefs that we as autonomous beings should per sue universal maxims as law, in order to be
virtuous and live a good life. The main difference between the categorical imperative and hypothetical imperative is the hypothetical imperative
ethics, incorporated ideas such as things are situationally right and wrong actions (Johnson). While hypothetical imperative views considered
principles such as means to ends, it did not consider the duty aspect in which Kant believed was the most important ideological principle in
maximizing utility. Kant believed the duty in itself should be sacred, in which we as rational beings overcome our physical presence and perform
actions for the ends in themselves. In a hypothetical imperative situation it would be permissible to tell a lie to a murderer, to protect a fellow family
member. While Kant stated it is never okay, as we lesson the murderer's humanity. Immanuel Kant will forever be remembered for his absolutism mind
frame, and while I disagree I commend his work, to achieve the best life possible for

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)