Shortcomings With Kantian Ethics - Essay Example

?Shortcomings with Kantian Ethics as Viewed from Maria von Herbert’s Exchange with Kant Introduction Immanuel Kant came up with an ethic theory that was duty oriented, which required people to first determine their duty in order to do what is considered ethical. This was the Kantian ethics and it required individuals to act according to their duties, which were of moral law. For all people to act morally they had to follow categorical imperative, which ensured that everyone acted according to the same duty irrespective of their desires or interests. Since these duties would apply to every rational individual, ethics would prevail as individuals would be acting under universal laws that are absolute, therefore, without events of contradictions occurring (Kay, 2007). This paper will examine Maria von Herbert’s interaction with Kant as seen in the reading by Rae Langton, thus pointing out the problems, with Kantian ethics, their severity and how the Kantian can suitably respond. Firstly, it is crucial to examine the details of the letters and the events that followed in order to chronologically assess the situation and pinpoint the main issues. In Rae Langton’s reading, a theme of friendship between Maria von Herbert, a young Austrian and Kant seems to welcome the reader. Herbert is presented as a keen follower of Kant and even with the on-going enmity between Germany and Austria; she still seems to be devoted to Kant’s ideologies. In the season of autumn in 1791, Herbert wrote Kant a letter disclosing her suffering caused by losing her lover due to revealing certain information to him. Agitated from emotion, she said that she had contemplated suicide but because of Kant’s theory, she had decided otherwise (Langton, 1992:2). Herbert felt that she should confess about a certain truth that she had not told her lover so that she could be at peace with herself. After confessing, the lover turned cold and the love that he had felt for Herbert faded, thus making Herbert miserable. Herbert had fortunately read Kant’s theories and since she was devoted to the Kantian ethics, she had decided not to take her own life as it would be morally unacceptable (Langton, 1992:2). Kantian ethics instructed that every individual was compelled by a duty to do what is morally right despite the consequences. In this context, Kant had argued that committing suicide was going against the categorical imperative, which in itself is a command that demands individuals not to commit suicide (Kant, 1785). Herbert was a staunch follower of Kantian ethics so she felt that it was morally wrong to commit suicide despite the pain and agony she was feeling. Although she had not taken her life, she wanted Kant to reveal to her, the values or worth of living such a miserable life with a lot of emotional pain and no good. She wanted Kant to give her an alternative that could make her feel that her life was worth once again. She also indicated that Kant’s philosophy had not helped her in dealing with her troubles (Langton, 1992:3). The letter evidently moved Kant as it conveyed a theme and a message of truth, virtue and honesty. These were qualities that moved Kant because he believed that speaking the truth was not only an ethical duty to oneself but to others (Mahon, 2009:214). Therefore, he sought a friend who advised him to reply to the letter. Kant talked about the dispute between desiring to keep individuals’ private matters to themselves and the need to openly talk about them especially when in a situation of immense love. Kant said individuals had an inward urge that set limits to excessive openness and allowed them to keep some aspects of life locked within them. Kant simply meant that it was ethically allowed for individuals to keep private matters to themselves but this was supposed to be recognised from lying (Langton: 1992: 3). Kant told Herbert that her lover had every right to be angry with her and she had to face the consequences of being dishonest. Kant declined to talk about suicide because he thought that talking about it would lead Herbert to committing the act. Suicide was not in accordance with the philosophy that Kant taught, therefore, the less he referred to it, the better the situation was. Kant also told Herbert that she needed not worry because her lover would reconsider as his anger quelled down that is, if he really loved her (Langton, 1992:4). In 1793, Kant received a letter from Herbert that explained with some details about the lie that she had confessed to her lover. Herbert wrote that the lie was actually a sin that she had decided to keep from her lover because she did not want to lose the friendship. As it is important to be honest with one’s lover, she decided to give away the lie and though she felt at peace, the lie also tore apart her lover. Herbert wrote that events had ensued as Kant had explained and though her lover had offered his intimate friendship again, she was not content and felt empty. She thought herself unnecessary, bored and without purpose, thus making her life unbearable. She asked for permission to see Kant and ask him questions about his bachelordom and his lack of desire to father children (Langton, 1992:4). Herbert talked about Kant’s philosophy and invoked thoughts that were inclined to show that she had found some faults in the Kantian theory. Herbert’s morality was in accordance with the categorical imperative and she found following the philosophy easy because all her pleasures and joys were gone leaving her with no desires to overcome. She had grown indifferent to almost everything and wanted to end her pointless life (Langton, 1992: 4). Herbert wrote that morality should be tied to sensuality and passion since there would be no point of engaging in morality only to live without passionless. She also talked about the second formation imperative that requires individuals not to treat others as means to one’s end. This categorical imperative orders individuals to treat themselves and other individuals, in every situation as an end but never as a means to an end (Kant, 1785). This means that individuals should not think of using people as objects in an effort to satisfy their own desires, pleasure or convenience (Kay, 1997). In the second letter, Herbert wrote that she was empty and had no ends thus finding it very easy to obey the Kantian ethics. She seems to suggest that if an individual has sensuality, desires and interests in life, it could be very hard for one to follow the categorical imperatives. Herbert’s life starts to demonstrate a challenge on Kant’s philosophy. Discounts moral emotions like compassion, sympathy and remorse Examining Kant’s positions on duty and inclination, one can conclude that there is a problem that surrounds the philosophy. Why make this observation? Kant argued that for an action to bear moral worth, it has to be executed for the purpose of completing a duty and not just merely conforming to the duty (Chackalackal, 2005: 124). What does this mean? For an action to be assumed to be morally worth, it should not be done through motivation but rather carried out as a duty. By motivations, he means inclinations, which encourage an individual to perform an action that should be a duty (Chackalackal, 2005: 125). Kant assumes that the individual would not carry out the action were it not for the inclination, thus disqualifying that action from bearing any moral worth. This is true to some extent but there are many exceptions. Take for example, a situation that requires people to help flood victims if they can. Individuals who sympathize with the flood victims and then help them will not be considered to have performed an action that bears moral worth. This is because, according to Kantian ethics, their actions have been motivated by inclinations, therefore, disqualifying them from having moral worth. However, individuals who harbour no feelings of sympathy towards the flood victims, but helped because the law says that they should, are said to have performed an action bearing moral worth. This clearly presents a problem with the Kantian ethics since the actions of human beings are influenced in many occasions by inclinations, which take form in desires, interests, loathing and lusts (Chackalackal, 2005: 123). Therefore, inclinations always affect human beings as they perform their actions. It is in the ability of defeating these inclinations that a person is able to perform a moral action. Take for example, encountering a thief who is in trouble but due to sympathy and overcoming all the resentment; one decides to help the thief. Is this action not morally right? In this situation, it is in that process of overcoming ones’ resentment and finding sympathy that a person shows morals. Herbert implies this notion in her second letter, where she writes to Kant about morality being an action that defeats such inclinations, thus making an action moral. Kantian ethics would not consider the action described in this paragraph to be morally right but it is. Kantian ethics ignore and assume that this aspect of morality is not in accordance with their doctrine; therefore, failing to recognise a crucial ideology (Word Press, 2011). Moral apathy restricts sound judgement and reasoning Rae Langton argues that Herbert is a Kantian saint, which is a point of view that Kant fails to see. Herbert no longer possesses inclinations, interests or desires thus living in moral apathy as she easily follows the law because she bears no inclinations that can contradict the moral law. Kant explains moral apathy as freedom from feelings of sensuality. Therefore, apathy is not indifference but the state of lacking sensual passions, desires or interests. Kant refers to apathy as bliss, which he defines as a state of complete freedom or independence from desires and inclinations. He says that a person must strive to achieve bliss but this is impossible because only the Supreme Being can achieve bliss. He infers to the Supreme Being is an intellectual entity, unaffected by nothing, has no inclinations or passion (Langton, 1992:5). Herbert describes her situation as one of complete submissiveness to the moral law since she has no inclinations. She says that her life is empty without the desires and inclinations so she feels dead. Kant wants people to achieve apathy in order to establish moral worth in their actions for if they were done with the involvement of inclinations, they would not have moral worth. However, when individuals attains moral apathy, they are not bound to make decisions based on reason but are bound by the moral law thus ignoring all kinds of feelings, therefore, abandoning sound judgement (Langton, 1992:5). Take the example of Herbert who finds no meaning in living. She is living for the sake of a moral law, which is a life strictly devoid of inclinations or any kind happiness. She is empty and wishes she was dead but cannot take her own life because of the same law that make her miserable. This is not proper reasoning. This means that she chooses to live with no purpose at all, which shows lack of sound reasoning. Ignoring consequences resultant from actions In Kantian ethics all duties are regarded as absolute. They cannot be changed and they apply to everyone at every situation. The duty of not telling a lie applies to everyone and no matter the situation, an individual must follow this rule absolutely. Kant argued that individuals have an obligation to state the truth always no matter the circumstances (Kant, 1785: 415). People are obligated by a categorical imperative to tell the truth regardless of what they feel is right. Categorical imperatives are morally obligating since they are based on reason. Individuals are required to follow the categorical imperative without making exceptions. Kant says that moral laws such as do not lie, or do not kill yourself have no exceptions. This means that we should do the right thing because we are ought to do the right thing. Therefore, individuals should always do the right thing regardless of the consequences (Angelfire, 2013). Herbert had to tell her lover the truth no matter the consequences, therefore, making her feel miserable when he took away his love. Herbert did not have an exception for she was bound by the moral law to tell the truth even if it meant that she would lose her lover. In the second letter, Herbert writes that she feels empty and wishes to die but since she is more devoted to the moral laws, she cannot commit suicide because it is going against the duty. Despite her troubles and having no purpose in life, she must push on and endure that life until she dies (Langton, 1992:7). How can a Kantian best respond to the shortcomings? Kantian ethics are useful when displaying moral significance as they help bring out some important aspects that other theories do not present. Although they are significant and of much help, Kantian theories seem to have overstepped some lines, therefore, proving ineffective when it comes to some situations. With reference to the work done in the previous sections, the Kantian ethics seem to have quite a number of shortcomings. The first challenge in the Kantian ethics is the dismissal of moral emotions like compassion and remorse, which are referred to as inclinations. The Kantian ethics should respond to this shortcoming by considering that a person can act with an inclination and still serve a moral purpose. There should be exceptions in this doctrine that serve to allow certain inclinations or situations to be reconsidered since events vary with circumstances. When looking into moral apathy, Kant insists that it is important to attain moral apathy, which is a state of having no inclinations, desires, or interests when making decisions about duties (Langton, 1992:6). Use of inclinations and desires, shows that one has empathy, which is a characteristic common in human beings and cannot be easily assumed. Kantian ethics should establish a way that an individual could use to reduce bias when it comes to making such decisions. Otherwise, this theory cannot work effectively on everyone. Kantian ethics require an individual to ignore or assume the consequences that arise from an individual’s action after completing a duty as required by the moral laws. This is a dangerous thing to assume because as reasonable human beings, individuals are supposed to take responsibility for their actions. This notion actually shows that the moral law is flawed as it cannot bear judgement over decisions made through it. Kantian ethics should make sure that responsibility is attached to the ethics. Conclusion Kantians will perform an action that is governed by a good will, which is derived from reason and performed because it is a duty and not motivated by inclinations. The consequences from this action are also not considered since doing the right thing should always come first. The duty of an individual is to obey moral law, which is communicated as a categorical imperative. The categorical imperative has two formulations where the first is the maxim of universalisability. It states that all individuals should always behave in accordance to the rules that everyone is following, therefore, leaving no room for contradictions that would give any one person an advantage over the other. The second formulation states that individuals should be treated as an end and never as a means only. This means that people should not think of others as things that can be utilised for one’s convenience (Kant, 1785). References Angelfire (n.p.) http://www.angelfire.com/space/omakridis/kant2.html Chackalackal, S. (2005) ‘Kant on Inclinations: ‘Alien’ or ‘Human’,’ Journal of Dharma, vol.30, no. 1, pp. 117-134. Retrieved November 20, 2013, from https://www.academia.edu/291435/Kant_on_Inclinations_Alien_or_Human Kay, C. (2000) Notes on Deontology. Notes on Deontology. Retrieved November 18, 2013, from http://webs.wofford.edu/kaycd/ethics/deon.htm Kant, I. (1785) Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Langton, R. (1992) 'Maria von Herbert's Challenge to Kant' Duty and Desolation, pp. 1-13. Mahon, J. 2006 'Kant and the perfect duty to others not to lie,' British Journal for the History of Philosophy, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 656 Word Press, (2011) Kant’s Morality: Summary and Problems, Tiger papers: Pondering the palimpsest and panoply of the planet. Retrieved November 20, 2013, from http://tigerpapers.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/kants-morality/ Read More