Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals - Essay Example

Kant: Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals Immanuel Kant was an 18th century philosopher who advanced ideas within a broad array of categories, perhaps most notably in the fields of ethics and aesthetics. In the Grounding for Metaphysics of Morals Kant presents a seminal philosophical view of morality that continues to be referenced by contemporary thinkers. In this work Kant contends that morality should be understood as an priori element. That is, something that should be understood and grasped not simply in terms of personal choice or understanding, but a universal principle that is applicable to all humanity at all times. In establishing his foundational understanding of morality Kant implements a number philosophical arguments and tenants. In these regards, Kant considers the importance of good will, describes four cases of action, considers moral law, and advances for formulas for this moral perspective. This essay considers these elements of Kants moral philosophy and advances possible objects to Kants argument. In establishing his moral philosophy Kant places substantial emphasis on the importance of good will. For Kant, the only thing which is good without qualification is the good will. In these regards, Kant states, “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good, without qualification, except a good will” (Kant). While an individual may display high character in regards to perseverance, or courage, if these actions are not established through an underlining good will Kant does not ultimately consider the individual moral. In establishing this point Kant examines the dichotomous interrelation of reason and instinct. While many individuals who are deemed happy enact a great degree of instinctual thought processes, individuals who have a highly developed sense of reason have cultivated a morally superior mode of existence. This is because, Kant believes, the cultivation of this reason is not out of self-interest, but out of a good unto itself. From this, Kant extends his philosophical grounding for morality by considering the nature of the will of the individual. In further advances his concept of good will as it relates to his metaphysics of moral, Kant articulates four cases of action. Each of the elements must be considered for what they ultimately say about moral actions in terms of the individuals underlining will. The first case of ethical action considers actions that are overtly self-interested. In these regards, one might consider an individual who murders another individual to steal their property. Few individuals would disagree that such an action is immoral. The problem becomes more challenging when considering the other cases of action. The second case involves actions that outwardly appear out of good will, but in actuality are out of self-interest. In these regards an example of a grocer who has fair and equitable prices is given; however, Kant states, “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” (Kant). The third case considers actions that are done in accord with moral duty, but are also motivated out of predisposed inclinations. In these regards, one might consider an individual who feeds homeless people, but finds it enjoyable to be a part of the social environment at the soup kitchen. Finally, the fourth case considers actions that are conducted in accord with a rational understanding of that which is moral, oftentimes in spite of an individuals predisposed inclination. This might include not stealing food, even though one is dying from hunger. In terms of abiding by a life of moral responsibility Kant advances an overarching moral law. In these regards, Kant proposes his seminal philosophical concept of the categorical imperative. In these regards Kant states, I have deprived the will of every impulse which could arise to it from obedience to any law, there remains nothing but the universal conformity of its actions to law in general, which alone is to serve the will as a principle, i. e., I am never to act otherwise than so that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law (Kant). Essentially what Kant is indicating is that rather than being situationally determined, morality should be considered only in relation to that which could be extended universally. While an individuals instincts or inclinations are generally understood to be in accord with Kants categorical imperative, in certain situations its necessary for an individual to implement their reasoning or rationality to ensure they are not mistaken. One might consider Kants moral law in relation to an individual that lies. While the individual may feel that they are justified in not telling the truth in a certain situation, Kant believes that they are wrong as when a lie is extended as a universal principle it is made impossible to embrace. Similarly, one might consider bullying. While it may appear that bullying is appropriate in a certain situation, as a universal principle it is not morally justifiable, so for Kant bullying does not meet the precepts established by the categorical imperative. In further establishing his metaphysics of morals, Kant articulates four different formulas that must be considered. The first formula is the formula of the universal law of nature. This simply means that an action should only be taken if it could be implemented as a universal law. The second formula is the formula of humanity. In these regards, Kant believes that an individual should not treat fellow humans as a means to an end, but an end in themselves. For instance, to use a person only to gain access to their garden would be wrong unless their was genuine friendship or personal appreciation involved. The third formula is the autonomy formula. This formula is the same as the first formula, but it extends it to note that an individual should act so that they could legislate universal law. Finally, the fourth formula is the kingdom of ends formula. This formula considers the confluence of the other formulas and argues that individuals should act such that their actions could be universal laws, legislated to other individuals, and that all individuals in a rational thinking kingdom could equally legislate them on others. While Kants metaphysics of morals makes a sound and convincing argument for the universal application of moral laws, there also exists a number of areas where one can find weaknesses in Kants argument. One such objection can be made to Kants heavy reliance on reason. It can be argued that in great part ones reasoning and rationality is conditioned by developmental events that influence their determination of what should be universally applicable. Another objection is that Kants moral imperatives are socially conditioned; that is, it would be possible to envision a society that embraces universal principles that are in opposition to another society. In todays society one sees this philosophical conflict in disagreements between Christianity and Islam. In a sense then, Kant presents what some would consider an ethnocentric interpretation of morality. In conclusion, its clear that Kant utilizes a number of elements in establishing his metaphysics of morals. In these regards, he places a high importance on good will, as it is only through actions without latent interest that the action is considered truly moral. In further establishing this principles Kant advances four cases of action that demonstrate different types of action in relation to their intention and morality. Kant also advances a moral law through the categorical imperative that establishes a means of determining what actions are moral. This is further established through four formulas. Finally, a number of possible objections to Kants metaphysics of morals are described. References Kant, Immanuel. "Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals." Athenaeum Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Nov 2010. . Read More