I Think, Therefore I Kant - Essay Example

I Think, Therefore I Kant Immanuel Kant revolutionized thinking at the turn of the 19th century and his philosophy of reason still resonates in the Western world. In his attempt to reconcile religion and science, he drew criticism from all sides. His works, often heady and lengthy, have at times made Kant difficult to understand. Yet beneath the surface lies an eloquent approach to philosophy and morality. Whether being praised or criticized, he has been called the "finisher and conqueror of Illumination" (Paulsen et al. 1902 p.13). A close examination of Kants ethical theory reveals why it drew such controversy and why it continues to persist. Kants individual uniqueness stems from his belief in what is called deontological ethics or the study of duty. According to Kant, an actions moral value does not stem from the consequences of the action, but rather from the motivation behind the will to act. When the action is universal and is motivated by only good will, it is a categorical imperative. In Kants words, "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (cited in ONeill 1993 p.177). Thus an action that is motivated by good will is universally good and has no alternative options for acting. Kant was also able to plot a course of philosophy toward rationalism and away from empiricism. Kant relied on reason and was able to demonstrate that experience and sensation alone could not account for nature or our actions. As Kemerling (2006) says, "Rationalism offers a naturalistic alternative to appeals to religious accounts of human nature and conduct". However, Kant remained sympathetic to empiricism and suggested the duality of reason and knowledge as two separate and valid spheres of endeavor. Kant also criticized the Utilitarian theories that evaluate the action based on the happiness it produced. According to Utilitarianism, whatever produces the most happiness in the most people is the moral course of action. This could lead to the happiness of many at the expense of a few peoples misery. Kants objection to this thinking was that it devalued the individual and could not be universally sustainable. Kants ethical theory advocated autonomy as a way to choose how to act. Autonomy is the ability and the freedom to act on the categorical imperative (Kemerling 2006). This insures that our actions are free and moral. It forms the basis of our self-determination. Heteronomy looks for motivation and principles from outside themselves. It considers the consequences of their choices or the influence of outside forces (Kemerling 2006). Autonomy dictates that we carefully consider our actions while heteronomy offers the actor little choice in their course of action. It may seem counter-intuitive that a categorical imperative can coincide with autonomy. If we have a sense of duty as dictated by the categorical imperative that says we must act with good will, it seems to deny free will and self-determination. Kant explained this by reasoning that moral law is a principle of reason itself. The categorical imperative is a binding obligation that we choose to act upon out of our own good reason. Acting in any other fashion, such as doing something to make someone happy, would not be the most moral action. It would be driven by the external world and would lack free rationalism. Kants ethical theory requires us to do something only because it is good and demands that we make that choice. Kants theory on ethical action is a philosophy that can at once explain our free will and also the requirements to need a Supreme Being. As a guide to decision making, the categorical imperative is a process that will keep vice and avarice out of our life. If our moral imperatives are the foundation of our reason then the freedom we have is the freedom to choose morally. ONeill demonstrates the choice as, "between our moral principles and our actual desires and inclinations" (177). Sound reasoning will dictate that we will do the right thing no matter who or where we are. Kant has further made allowances for the world that is beyond our knowing. While dogmatic empiricism has attempted to define and explain the realm of the Supreme Being, Kant has only made allowances for what can not be known. This seems to be the most logical approach, to acknowledge the existence without attempting to be so presumptuous as to have any knowledge of it. ONeill (1993) says that Kants ethics are an "attempt to vindicate universal moral principles without reference to preferences or to a theological framework" (p. 184). Kants approach to ethics is important and I often do act in accordance with it. There is a sense of moral right and wrong that transcends our own personal world. However, the problem becomes in defining what is morally correct. Making someone happy by offering charity may be the morally correct thing to do and also be driven by external forces. Our free will only extends to the point that our judgement allows it to be free. To pursue an outcome by any means can be an infringement on someone elses rights or well being. Our actions must be considerate of the consequences of all the affected parties. Therefore a successful action, defined as an action that is good and has the intended consequence, is one that "renders the actor efficacious and autonomous" (Korsgaard n.d.). I believe that to successfully act on the categorical imperative, we must consider all the factors of the action. It is still free will even if it is influenced by external forces. Kants influence on philosophy has been one of the most sweeping and wide-ranging movements in history. It paved the way for our belief in free will as well as the right to self-determination. His theories also helped mend the split between science and church by defining their roles with the same philosophical brush. Kants works, though lengthy, are worth the time spent examining them and is the moral thing to do. References Kemerling, G. (2006, October 21). Philosophy pages. Retrieved February 6, 2007, from http://www.philosophypages.com/index.htm Korsgaard, C. (n.d.). Self-Constitution: Action, identity, and integrity. Retrieved February 17, 2007, from http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~korsgaar/Korsgaard.LL3.pdf ONeill, O. (1993). Kantian ethics. In P. Singer (Ed.), Blackwell companions to philosophy: A companion to ethics (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Paulsen, F., Creighton, J., & Lefevre, A. (1902). Immanuel Kant, his life and doctrine. New York: C. Scribners Sons. Retrieved February 6, 2007, from Google Book. Read More