Immanuel Kant Essay Example for Free

Immanuel Kant EssayA. Kants ethical openingStandard coherentity is the major stand of Kants ethical theory. lesson exigencys are also associated with the standard rationality but this standard could be ground on instrumental regulations of rationality or based on the sui generis rational instinct. A conventional con ruleance could be achieved through the analysis of rationality with instrumental principles. Kant argued that conforming to instrumental and non-instrumental principles (Categorical Imperative) allow both be justified to rationality (Kants clean-living philosophic system 2004). Kant supported his arguments that being rational reflect turn will, law of free will. Each of us is accepted based on our autonomous reasons and gain equal respect from other people. According to him, the standard of rationality is the key foundation of example requirements. Violation of much(prenominal)(prenominal) rule is thereby irrational.Kant believed that a good will is the highest whim of being much(prenominal) good person, or a person of good will (Kants Moral school of thought 2004). There are no other qualifications of being good other than good will. Basically, the notion of good will is the possession of a will that is ordered and on the basis with the notion of the clean-living law. A person of good will is the atomic number 53 who make decisions, do good things in such a way that he/she told to be morally and taking moral considerationsAccording to Kant, the outcome for bet for the inherent and fundamental good was not inherently good. Happiness and pleasure could be the result from close to evil acts. In fact, he use the term good to describe the good will the resultant role in abidance with traffic. He believed that reason would give individuals to work out what ones duty was.Kant also criticized the notion that we are liberal. According to him, we cant be described as free if our actions are just circling around a delimitate boundary. He also stressed that following the look that god and life is existing, morality would make no feel.The principle that one should act in accordance with such truths was criticized by Kant for this principle says that we would perform these actions of which it is true that they are right and ought to be performed. Wolffs principle tells that actions must be performed if it falls under the concept to be done.Autonomy and HeteronomyIn philosophical perspective, autonomy refers when a person/individual acts by himself/herself based from his/her internal drives, needs and ideals while heteronomy is defined when an individual acts based upon outside forces and responsibilities. According to Kant, Autonomous agents acts to what their instinct tell them (Kants Moral Philosophy 2004). In addition, they act in accordance with the categorical imperious of willing what is univerzable to be known and consistent with moral law.Heteronomous agents think first to the possible conseque nces of their actions as affected by their environment (Kants Moral Philosophy 2004). They derive principles of actions from outside by putting into consideration the consequences of their action or the perception of others towards one thing or object. In a narrow perspective (person), autonomy reflects to selecting right decisions for one-self. In broader sense (political perspective), autonomy reflects the right of self-determination (Kants Moral Philosophy 2004). A heteronomous will lies its rules of actions that have been legislated outwardly to it while autonomous will is completely self-legislating.Kants Categorical ImperativeKant is known form his theory called the categorical imperative rooted from the idea of duty. According to him, categorical imperative is a principle that is essentially and fundamentally legitimate universally good to him and to others it requires to comply with when the situation is associated with the moral law. His theory is the fundamental foundati on at the basis of all our moral values and duties. If we observe, it coined the word imperative. His theory is an imperative for it is a command. It informs and commands us to exercise our wills in a particular way, and not performing the opposite of the theory.Kant distinguished another form of oughts other than our moral duties. This principle is so called hypothetical imperative (Kants Moral Philosophy 2004) which is being based on a quite different kind of principle. Like categorical imperative, hypothetical imperative is also a command that also applies to us in virtue of having a good will. However, it is not simply a virtue for we have need of to exercising our wills. Hence, this theory is a command in a conditional form.Kant listed three formulation of the categorical imperative which he believed to be almost uniform order of Universal Law (First Formulation), Formula of the End in Itself Second Formulation), and Formula of Autonomy (Third Formulation). The Formula of Un iversal Law simply states that the maxim should be selected. A supreme law guides this formulation to do deeds in harmony with that maxim. The first formulation is interpreted as universality test having 5 steps (1) finding the agents maxim (2) putting oneself in a parallel concomitant on the real world agent followed that maxim (3) decide on contradictions (4) if theres contradiction, play playacting on that maxim is not permissible in the real world, and (5) if theres no contradiction, acting on that maxim is allowed.The second formulation simply says to respect for human beingity. Dont put an hold on to a certain situation by doing bad deeds just to serve as a getaway. According to him, we must all act agreely to every rational being and to place restrictions on the acts we adopt on the search of our ends, do not accept it.Kant enumerated two kinds of imperative hypothetical and categorical. theoretic imperative requires an immediate action because it is a necessity and a requirement. In example, if I am hungry, wherefore I must eat something. Categorical imperative refers to an unmodified, categorical prerequisite that is both a requirement and justified.In Kants hypothetical imperative, he believed that it would not be accepted. Hypothetical moral systems cannot be as bases for moral judgments since imperatives are subjective. What is morally accepted in an individual may not be absolutely true for others. Consequently, the categorical imperative was presented as an option to the inconsistency of hypothetical imperative (Kants Moral Philosophy 2004).Categorical Imperative Autonomous Ethical ChoiceThe foundation of Kants theory states that human wills are self-directed. He believed that we could understand and justify moral requirements if we could be self-governing. Freedom is not merely consisting of some(prenominal) law that everyone is liberated to perform a certain actions. However, emancipation is consisting of a law in such a way that th is law, in some sense, would allow individuals for ones own making. The idea of freedom as autonomy is where a person has laid down laws where he has also the decisive authority.Kant explains that free will is naturally inexplicable. A rational person would base his/her decisions on reasons and justifications of his/her act. Categorical Imperative is met when a person justified his/her acts. Thus, reflecting to autonomous ethical choice of a person. With our free will and/or autonomous ethical choices, we act on it objectively.B. Kants Ethical Theory An AnalysisFor me, I support Kants theory on ethical decision-making. Kant pointed-out, we cannot exceed to the limitations of our thinking. Based from our line of reasoning, we justified things objectively. We make decisions based on our understanding. I think these statements are true and absolute. Kants argued that categorical imperative must reflect on our free will. He argued that instrumental and non-instrumental principles are ne cessary to meet the categorical imperatives. General facts may or may not be true for a person who do not understand its concepts or understand it on the other perspective. Good will responds to the universal moral law and we follow these laws according to our autonomous acts. We accept humanity, rational agency as represented by our understanding.