A Theory of Deontological Ethics - Essay Example

Philosophy

1.

Kantian ethics is a theory of deontological ethics developed by Immanuel Kant, a philosopher in Germany. In ethics, deontology refers to approaches that utilize rules to differentiate what right or correct from what is incorrect or wrong. The principle of the theory relies on the thought that: it is not possible to think about anything in the world, or beyond the world, that could be regarded as suitable without restriction or limitation apart from goodwill.

Kant developed this principle due to Enlightenment rationalism, citing that any action can be useful only if the maxim or the underlying principle is an obligation to the moral principles, and originates from an aspect of the task in the actor (Misselbrook, 2013).

In helping provide a deeper understanding of the theory, Kant applied lying as an application and an example of his ethics. He said that since it is an outstanding obligation to tell or speak the truth, people must not lie, even if the act would lead to more positive outcomes than saying the truth.

According to the German Philosopher Emmanuel Kant, the categorical imperative is supposed to offer a means for people to evaluate their moral actions and make a moral judgment. In this ethical principle, it is not mandatory to carry out specific functions. The approach is basically empty, which simply means it is just a formal procedure through which one can evaluate an action that is seemingly morally relevant.

According to Kant, the laws on moral or moral laws are usually impartial and universal as well as rational. This categorical way is a criterion for formulating ways by which an action can go through the universality test, rationality, and impartiality. These categories do not only serve these functions alone. It has other various expressions or forms that are essential for everyone to know.

The philosopher holds the belief that the other essential forms of the Categorical Imperative are equivalent and ultimately. These tow forms work in a manner that what one type forbids can be forbidden too by the other kind. This is a more straightforward way of saying that there are two criteria or means of performing or observing things in a similar moral reality. The two forms are generally intended to serve as the standard expressions, an ordinary moral sense possessed by a large number of people having similar actions that are usually wrong (Satkunanandan, 2011).

Kant asserts that the relationship that exists between the two Categorical Imperative is a command. These commands are considered to be hypothetical. With this statement, Kant meant that the commands rely on the goals that require to be full filled. The goals are particular, and they rely on specific individual goals, desires, and personal situations. These commands are applicable for a given group of people having the purposes mentioned above and desires (Satkunanandan, 2011).

The theory is universal because all individuals in their rational virtue act clearly in a similar manner. It is impartial because our own biases are not guiding our actions, but only because the activities abide by the autonomy and dignity of every person. They do not place personal ambitions beyond the respect and dignity that other people deserve.

In this theory, Kant also talks about the duties of reason. He states that reason has numerous functions. First, ideas or reasons provide logical functions, for example, science and also the practical function. The practical purpose is perceived to be realistic in that the reason, together with desires and feelings, determines people's character and choice. The role can further be understood in two ways: "means-ends" function. It is also perceived as a moral function. In this particular case, Kant does not make the calculative reason equal to the moral reason. However, he does not criticize this part of the practical reason. He says that ethical reasons have useful purposes in human life and play more roles in human life. Even though the practical reason should be supported and assisted with a distinct category of reasoning, moral reasoning, this reasoning aspect relies largely on necessity and universality. This conception is profoundly and deeply affected by enlightenment.

Kant concludes by stating that it is ethical that the categorical comparative should offer a formulation through which people can use the available human reason to select or determine the rational or the correct thing one should do.

2.

Animal rights refer to an idea that specific or all animals are offered possession to survive on their own and that they are accorded their fundamental interests, such as suffering alleviation so that they are provided similar consideration that is equal to the interest that people are granted. This means that a given group of animals should be treated equally as human beings considering their own needs and desires.

The advocates of animal rights oppose the assignment of fundamental protection and moral value on the foundation of given species membership alone. The idea of a specimen in animal rights was first developed by Ryder Richard. The advocates argued that Richard's views were very irrational and judgmental.

Everyone needs to support human rights. As sentient organisms like human beings, they should be treated equally as human beings to prevent them from being subjected to unjust suffering. The animals’ advocacy groups cite that animals should be entitled to equal rights like human beings so that they may not continue to suffer unjustly (Greenebaum, 2018).

In Peter Singer’s book Animal Liberation, he asserts that the fundamental principles of equality not only needs identical or equal treatment, it only wants equal consideration. This thought forms a crucial distinction when tackling the animal rights subject. According to him, animals should enjoy equal rights to live lives devoid of exploitation and suffering. He further states that each animal should suffer from a similar degree, experienced by human beings (Greenebaum, 2018).

Animal advocacy groups and various humanitarian organizations also hold the thought that animals possess an inherent worth. This worth refers to a value which is separate from how they are useful to human beings. They further stated that animal rights are not mere philosophy, meaning they are social movements challenging society's conventional perception that the nonhuman animals only exist for individual use. They say prejudice should not allow people to deny other people the rights they expect to receive from them. This action should be a similar manner by which animals should be treated.

To finalize o the matter, it would be proper if people acknowledge that having animal rights would make people value animal lives. This is because rights are practically more essential than interests. This belief is supported by the opinion that rights impose a responsibility on others, which compels them to accept.

It is required of every individual to prevent animal cruelty. Necessarily, there are two basic categories of animal cruelty or abuse. These include commercial and personal exploitation. Commercial cruelty or abuse refers to abuse, which is committed mainly to improve the profits of an organization, while, personal abuse refers to cruelty between the individual and an animal.

Several practices can be done to fight animal cruelty, the best and common way to achieve this is by teaching many people how to treat animals. Animal educators should provide extensive education on how people can humanely and safely keep their animals. They should also tell people how to detect if an animal is getting harmed and what people can do to prevent this unethical act.

Another way to prevent cruelty is to report those who neglect and abuse animal rights. People should inform those who violate animal rights to the relevant authorities and the police. Those who witness these unethical acts should immediately report the offenders to prevent future or further cruelty.

Thirdly, people should shelter animals who are in need. It only through us that animals can receive a helping hand. Mistreated animals, at times, requires our support immediately. Through these acts, we can change animals' lives by taking them out of dangerous situations.

People should also demand stricter that protects the rights of animals. Harsher penalties and stronger animal welfares ensure that there are minimal cruelty cases.

Lastly, people should intervene whenever they come across any animal neglect, cruelty, or abuse. Everyone should strive hard and do whatever they can to stop people from mistreating animals. Everyone should be sensible and not put the animal's lives in danger.