Kantian Ethics Summary Notes

Kantian Ethics AO1

• Kant aims to base morality on reason to create a harmonious society.
• Believes we can discover a universal moral law through reason.
• The good will is motivated by duty, not personal feelings or desires.
• Distinguishes between hypothetical and categorical imperatives:
  • Hypothetical Imperative: Do X if you want Y, based on personal goals/desires.
  • Categorical Imperative: Do X, universally applicable without reliance on personal feelings.
• First Formulation of CA: Only act if it is universalizable.
  • Example: Everyone stealing is impossible, as it negates property rights.
  • Example: Universal lying negates honesty and trust.
• Second Formulation: Treat persons as ends, not merely as means.
• Third Formulation: Act as if part of a society where Kant's ethics are universally applied.

Clashing Duties

Strength:

• Kantian ethics provides ethical clarity with precise rules available to rational beings.
• Engages individual autonomy for a democratic society.

Weakness:

• Sartre’s example: Duties can clash (e.g., soldier vs. caring for a parent).
• Both actions are universalizable but can't be done simultaneously.

Evaluation:

• Imperfect duties can have multiple fulfillments (e.g., soldier's alternates).
• Kant argues finding alternatives resolves duty clashes, but it's not always possible.
• Duties can't be true if they are impossible to fulfill simultaneously.

Kant Ignoring the Moral Value of Emotions

Strength:

• Kant views emotions as unreliable, hence reason is more stable for moral decisions.
• Moral actions are duty-based, not emotion-based.

Weakness:

• Stocker: Actions from emotion (visiting a friend) have moral value.
• Williams: Acting from habit or emotion can be good, not just duty.

Evaluation:

• Stocker's critique: Emotions can lead to right actions.
• Aristotle suggests emotions can be cultivated for virtuous behavior.

Kant vs. Consequentialism

Strength:

• Kant critiques consequentialism; consequences can't be fully controlled.
• Deontological ethics prioritizes intent over outcome.

Weakness:

• Situations like 'murderer at the door' criticize Kant's rigidity.
• Consequentialism considers predictable outcomes in moral decisions.

Evaluation:

• Kant’s approach is challenged by the reasonable expectation of outcomes (Singer).
• Consequences should factor into ethical considerations.