Does Kant provide a helpful method for moral decision making

Question 1

What is Kantian Ethics – where does it come from?

Answer 1

Doing one’s duty according to moral law – this is derived by practical reason from the noumenal realm (the realm of abstract ideas) = transcendent idealist

Question 2

Introduction - FOR

Answer 2

Absolutist deontological approach, which follows the idea of doing ones duty in accordance with the good will

Question 3

Introduction - AGAINST

Answer 3

Relativist would disagree and argue that morality needs to be relativised to each circumstance

Question 4

Introduction - POSITION

Answer 4

Not helpful as absolutist approach not helpful in a contingent world

Question 5

Section 1: theme

Answer 5

Idea of the good will and duty

Question 6

Section 1: AO1

(Duty)

Answer 6

Humans are autonomous beings, who can access the noumena (realm of ideas) and apply this a priori reason practically to the phenomenal real (realm of observations/ experience) to act in accordance with the Good will – the only good without qualification. This means that in decision making people should act in accordance with the moral law for the sake of duty and not for own self gain as this would be immoral.

Question 7

Section 1: AO2 FOR

(Duty)

Answer 7

1) Bloom: empathy distorts our world view and would be a bad basis for rational decision making
- Helpful as makes people separate their morality from their emotion and be unbiased and fair in their decisions rather than acting for their own benefit.

2)Reason and duty makes people impartial.
- Helpful as most moral outcomes in decision making as people wont be acting for their own self gain

Question 8

Section 1: AO2 AGAINST

(Duty)

Answer 8

1) Hume: Can’t separate ourselves from our emotions as this is what motivates us to act. People donate to charity because they feel sympathy not because it’s their duty
-Kantian ethics is unhelpful in moral decision making as it is unpractical. Humans can’t separate their morality and emotions and won’t follow their duty but their emotions instead.

2) Shouldn’t ignore the consequences of our actions as people would then lack empathy, which is a central part of being a human
-Not helpful in decision making as the outcomes of the action are just as important as the action in itself

Question 9

Section 1: AO2 CONCLUSION

(Duty)

Answer 9

Kantian Ethics is helpful with moral decision making as it advocates an impartial approach with ensures everyone is equal. However, arguably this is unworkable in practise as to do one’s duty one must separate themselves from their emotion, which is not possible as this is central to being human, and so Kantian ethics is unhelpful in decision making as it is to hard to extract emotion from the decision.

Question 10

Section 2: theme

Answer 10

Is such an absolute approach helpful in moral decision making

Question 11

Section 2: AO1

(Categorical imperative)

Answer 11

Categorical imperative “unconditional imperative” that all moral people follow. Imperative has three forms: Principle of Law; Principle of Autonomy; Principle of ends.

Principle of Law – Only actions that are moral are those, which can be universalised without contradiction for example if the maxim stated ‘I may always break my promises when it benefits me’ their would be no point in making promises and maxim would be pointless .

Question 12

Section 2: AO2 FOR

(Categorical imperative)

Answer 12

1) Offers consistency in all cultures and societies so everyone is treated fairly.
-Helpful as absolute rules, which clearly defines when actions are moral/immoral

Question 13

Section 2: AO2 AGAINST

(Categorical imperative)

Answer 13

1) Principle may have immoral outcomes. If confronted with a murderer who asks where the victim is hiding we would have to act in accordance with the universalised maxim “do not lie” and we are morally required to tell the truth despite the consequences.

2) Still to hard to apply to situations as allowing murder seems immoral and wrong.
Rachels: Rules do not need to be absolute = if we can conceive of a rational person, acting out of duty, admitting the same exception to the rule, then we can universalise a rule-with-exceptions built in.
-This seems more practical and moral within a situation as although still acting in accordance with moral law, sometimes different situations need different actions.

Question 14

Section 2: AO2 CONCLUSION

(Categorical imperative)

Answer 14

The basis of Kant’s Principle of Law seems morally correct as it offers a fair society, in which there are clear fixed guidelines that people follow, this is also strengthened by this approach being favoured in most legal systems = Helpful
However as we live in a contingent world it would make more sense for the rules not to be so absolute as each individual circumstance is different and sometimes a different course of action is needed for the most moral outcome.

Question 15

Section 3: theme

Answer 15

Too utopian ?

Question 16

Section 3: AO1

(principle of ends)

Answer 16

Principle of ends: Universalises our humanity as to treat everyone with the same freedom/ dignity as yourself
Principle of autonomy: Live as if everyone is acting in accordance with duty and the Good Will

Question 17

Section 3: AO2 FOR

(principle of ends)

Answer 17

1) Although humanity may never be able to achieve such a perfect state of utopian coexistence, we can at least strive to approximate this state to an ever greater degree.
-Helpful as guides our decision making so that we can begin to reach a more moral society rather than our decisions being for personal gain

Question 18

Section 3: AO2 AGAINST

(utopian)

Answer 18

1) Schopenhauer Kant’s ethics are too utopian as they only focus on what ‘ought’ to happen in the perfect world and not what is practical in read world problems
not helpful as most people will not comply, and put their own needs first thus not helpful in moral dilemmas

2) Unrealistic as not everyone will act in accordance to the maxims
-Unhelpful in decisions i.e. pacifism some agree/disagree and those who agree may be an easy target for those who disagree – seems immoral to place them in danger

Question 19

Section 3: AO2 CONCLUSION

(utopian)

Answer 19

Kant’s ethical approach advocates for a morally better society, which seems a helpful basis for decision making. However, ethics are still to impractical within the real world, and could people who are acting in compliance with moral law at risk – seems unethical. Not a good basis for decision making.