7. 7
Deontology
The theory of duty or moral obligation.
Duty:
Role-related duty
General duty
Obligation:
Requirement set on a person because of
his/her identity.
8. 8
Basic Kantian themes
1. Personal autonomy:
The moral person is a rational self-leglislator.
2. Respect:
Persons should always be treated as an end,
not a means. ‘No persons should be used.’
3. Duty:
the moral action is one that we must do in
accordance with a certain principle, not
because of its good consequence.
9. 9
Kant’s philosophy:
What can I know?
Critique of Pure Reason
(1781)
What ought I do?
Groundwork for the
Metaphysic of Morals
(1785); Critique of
Practical Reason (1788)
What can I hope for?
Critique of Judgment
(1790); Religion within
the Limits of Reason
Alone (1793)
Immanuel Kant
(1724-1804)
10. 10
Phenomena and Noumena
Phenomena:
things as they appear to us; empirical and
therefore changeable.
Noumena:
things-in-themselves, which can’t be known by
the use of senses.
Kant argues that if there is such a thing as
moral reality, it must be founded on the
noumena, and this is because…
11. 11
The moral law is in its character
absolute, and it can allow no
exception. And empirical
knowledge simply cannot
establish such a law.
13. 13
The moral worth
On Kant’s view, the moral worth of an action
is not determined by its consequences
because:
14. 14
1. It is possible that someone does something out
of evil intention, but ends up bringing good
consequences to society.
2. It is also possible that someone does something
out of good intention, but ends up bringing
about bad consequences.
3. The consequences of an action are not under
our control.
4. We can only control our motives when acting as
a moral person.
5. Therefore the moral worth of an action is given
by our good will.
16. 16
The right motive
‘For example, it is always a matter of duty that a
dealer should not over charge an inexperienced
purchaser; and wherever there is much commerce
the prudent tradesman does not overcharge, but
keeps a fixed price for everyone, so that a child
buys of him as well as any other. Men are thus
honestly served; but this is not enough to make us
believe that the tradesman has so acted from duty
and from principles of honesty: his own advantage
required it;
17. 17
it is out of the question in this case to suppose that
he might besides have a direct inclination in
favour of the buyers, so that, as it were, from love
he should give no advantage to one over another.
Accordingly the action was done neither from duty
nor from direct inclination, but merely with a
selfish view.’
(http://eserver.org/philosophy/kant/metaphys-of-morals.txt)
18. 18
The right motive can be a motive out of either:
self-interest,
sympathy (natural inclination), or
a sense of duty (the voice of conscience).
Only the final motive will count on Kant’s view.
19. 19
Hypothetical Vs categorical
imperatives
Hypothetical imperative:
What I ought to do if some conditions hold.
E.g., Maxim: I ought to attend the lecture if I
want to pass my examination.
Categorical imperative:
What I ought to do unconditionally.
E.g., Maxim: I ought not to murder no matter
what goal I have.
20. 20
Two formulations of the
categorical imperative
1. Act only on that maxim that you can will as
a universal law.
2. Always treat humanity, whether your own
person or that of another, never simply as a
means but always at the same time as an
end.
21. 21
One Kant’s view, all moral imperatives are
categorical imperatives.
They are universally valid and have equal
forces to EQUALLY FREE and
RATIONALAGENTS.
22. 22
An example: why lying is wrong
If we use consequences as the basis of
moral worth, sometimes lying is right
because it makes a lot of people happy.
But the maxim that supports lying cannot
pass the ‘universality test’ and the ‘humanity
test’.
23. 23
Lying is wrong because:
1. If everybody lies, then words lose its
function to express truth. The principle of
lying therefore cannot be universalized.
2. Lying can be successful only if we use other
people’s ignorance. But in this case we are
treating them only as a means to our ends.
24. 24
Freedom and the kingdom of ends
Given that all rational beings are equal, a kingdom
comprising those beings must not favour any party or
treat the other as inferior.
It follows that in the kingdom of ends everybody
should be equally free and should not be a means to
other people’s end.
The law thus set up is a contract between free and
rational agents.
25. 25
Morality is thus a matter of social
contract made between free and
rational agents.
27. 27
Motivational problems
Why should I obey to the moral law?
Answer: Because I want to be a wholly free
(autonomous) person who acts on the
principle that I find most reasonable.
Why should I respect other persons?
Answer: This is simply because rational
persons are equal.
28. 28
Freedom or equality?
Is autonomy or equality the fundamental
value in ethics? What if they conflict each
other?
Answer: In principle they do not conflict each
other, because both are built up in the idea of
reason.
But in practice…?
29. 29
Conflicts of duties
If duty A conflicts with duty B, how can they
be universalized?
Example:
I have a universal duty not to kill the Fat man.
I also have a universal duty to save the five
workers.
What should I do?
30. 30
Non-rational beings
The moral law is set up by rational agents who
mutually respect each other. Non-rational beings
such as animals are not protected by that law
because they don’t have this sense of responsibility.
If we have a duty not to be cruel to animals, it cannot
be for their sake, but for the reason that we will hurt
our own rationality in doing so (that we will develop a
bad personality in this practice).
31. 31
Some questions to consider
If I am a Kantian, should I support:
1. Participatory democracy?
2. Representative (market) democracy?
3. Capitalism?
4. Revolutionary Marxism?
5. Confucian ethics?
6. Anarchism?
33. 33
Using human beings in experiments
Stanley Milgram’s experiment
Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study
Main question:
When will be wrong to use a person in
academic research?
34. 34
The doctrine of informed consent
The Nuremberg code:
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely
essential. This means that the person involved should have the
legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be
able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention
of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or
other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have
sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the subject matter
involved as to enable him to make an understanding and
enlightened decision.
35. 35
Autonomy: A Kantian interpretation
By saying that we respect persons as autonomous
agents, we imply that they are having equal statuses
with us, that we cannot treat them as a means only.
Using somebody implies an imbalanced power
structure, meaning that the users are
in a higher rank;
have more power;
have ends in the action plan that the inferior party
cannot share.
36. 36
Autonomy thus requires that if I am to
be treated as a means, I must also be
able to recognize the experimenter’s
end as my end. If I can recognize the
promoting of collective interests as an
end that I share without contradiction, I
can say being deceived is my choice.
37. 37
Milgram’s experiment
You are hired by an experimenter to conduct
an experiment.
In the experiment you play the part of a
teacher.
I am a teacher now.
Another participant, after drawing the lot,
plays the part of a learner.
I am a learner. And I
have to remember the
words of the teacher
and read them back.
You give the learner some words to remember,
and ask him to read out after some time.
If the answer is correct, you say…
Move on to
the next
word!
If it is incorrect…
Teacher, give him a
punishment. A 15 volt
electric shock.
APPLE--PEACH;
LEMON—HONEY;
CAR—TRASH;
DEMOCRACY—PLATO;
CHINGWA—TEDDY
BEAR…
CHINGWA--
…SNOOPY
Wrong!
38. 38
The punishment part
You are in control of a machine generating a
voltage ranging from 15 to 450 volts.
Low voltage:
15
Medium voltage:
250
High voltage: 450
Dangerous
The experimenter keeps instructing you to increase
voltage, saying that he takes full responsibility for that.
Do it. I am in
charge of all
this.
You do it accordingly.
You regret. ‘Why didn’t I stop, man?’
The learner screams and shows great pain.
39. 39
Milgram’s trick
The lucky thing, or the bad thing is that…
No one in fact got
hurt. The learner is
a great pretender.
You are cheated, man.
There’s no electric
shock at all.
You are angry. You think it is unethical.
You fooled
me?
41. 41
Final questions
Which experiment is more unethical
according to Kantian ethics?
Is the respect to autonomy something
absolute? Is a lesser degree of autonomy
totally unacceptable?
How can we respect people when they are
not fully rational?
42. 42
References
Driver, Julia, Ethics: the Fundamentals,
Blackwell Publishing, ch.5
Mackinnon, Barbara (2007), Ethics: Theory
and Contemporary Issues, Thomson
Wadsworth, ch.5.
Rachels, James (1995), The Elements of
Moral Philosophy, McGraw-Hill, ch.9 & 10.
