🟣| Morality - Kantian Ethics Analysis Flashcards
(23 cards)
1
Q
Key Features:
Strengths
3
A
- Natural Duty (Deontology)
- Religion (Reason)
- Consistency (Reason)
2
Q
Key Features:
Weaknesses
3
A
- Immoral Duties
- Focus on Motives
- Duty Only Moral Motive
3
Q
Categorical Imperative:
Strengths
4
A
- Absolute Moral Rules (UL)
- Straightforward Application (UL)
- Respect for People & Rights (EII)
- Leniancy
4
Q
Categorical Imperative:
Weaknesses
4
A
- Formulation of Maxims
- Universal Maxims
- Consideration of Consequences
- Conflicting Duties
5
Q
Key Feature Strengths:
Natural Duty
4
A
- Everyone has duties that we follow in our lives
- Fulfilling such duties come to us naturally and is sometimes a necessary part of living a good life, so we don’t need to change our way of living to apply Kantian ethics
- Similarly, humans already have experience or acting against our desires to prioritise our duties.
- Example: you may prefer to go out with friends than stay in and do your homework, but you have a duty to prioritise studies so that you are a good, successful student
6
Q
Key Feature Strengths:
Religion
3
A
- Using reason alone makes his theory more accessible
- All kinds and extents of religious belief can apply Kantian ethics
- Fits with idea that morality is separate from religion
7
Q
Key Feature Strengths:
Consistency
A
Humans using their rational abilities makes Kant’s theory more consistent as the same conclusions can be reached
8
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Immoral Duties
4
A
- People have acted on duty to commit heinous acts
- Example: Nazi soldiers eliminating Jews because it was their duty under Hitler
- Kant fails to provide a proper criterion as to what makes our will to do our duty good.
Acting rationally will always result in morally commendable acts, but for Nazi soldiers it would be perfectly rational to participate in anti-semitism - Shows how his logic can be used to permit inhumane acts we would typically disagree with
9
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Immoral Duties - Counter Argument
5
A
- Defended as a misconception of duty
- Duties we have as members of a community, or a country are all subject to qualification – they should be consistent with our greater duties which align with our reasoning.
- Our personal duties hold more importance than local or national laws do, so we shouldn’t blindly follow them as this is insufficient
- May be true, but does not disprove the criticism as Kant doesn’t explicitely state this
- Humans will naturally follow their country/community rules because they are conditioned to or must for their safety, so it is much harder to act against this
10
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Focus on Motives
3
A
- Deontology is extreme in Kant’s theory - consequences should never be considered in a moral dilemma as they are irrelevant
- Motives are more irrelevant as their impact is less compared to how consequences play out
- We can see and feel consequences, but we never know for certain someones motive, so if the outcome is positive does it really matter to us?
11
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Focus on Motives - Counter Argument
5
A
- Motives do become important in dilemmas with bad outcomes
- Example: a surgeon tries to correct a spine defect but paralyses the patient; if they intended to do right and the result was unexpected they wouldn’t be blamed, but if they were motivated by greed to work overtime after a long day for extra money we wouldn’t be so forgiving
- Kant’s focus on motives isn’t entirely irrelevant as we can see how motives change perceptions of two scenarios with the same outcome
- Motives only become important with bad consequences, which makes this weakness valid
- Humans naturally look to consequences, which triumphs motives when consequences are different - if the surgeon motivated by greed performed a successful surgery, would we still prefer the contrary because the motive was less controversial?
12
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Duty Only Moral Motive
4
A
- Kant ignores other motives which could be deemed as equally moral
- We experience positive inclinations which we act on frequently
- Example: visiting our grandparents out of our love and consideration of spending time with them deemed immoral - unfair as this is a natural human respone, and also highlights problems with ignoring consequences
- Only visiting grandparents out of duty seems detached and morally lacking, making Kant’s theory impersonal
13
Q
Key Feature Weaknesses:
Duty Only Moral Motive - Counter Argument
4
A
- Kant doesn’t say we can’t do anything solely stemming from duty
- Example: visiting your grandparents because it is your duty but also because you enjoy spending time with them would be moral because the main motive is duty despite the inclination and personal preference
- However, not being ale to prioritise own wants and inclinations over acting on duty is unrealistic - any scenario where we can act on duty and personal preference is coincidental
- Applying Kantian ethics could become tiresome and more of a chore instead of how we act to be moral human beings.
14
Q
Categorical Imperative Strengths:
Absolute Moral Rules
2
A
- The concept of perfect duties makes Kant’s theory fairer and more agreeable for the majority
- Many believe that there are some things, such as lying or torture, which are always wrong, and these formed into perfect duties allow for everyone to be held at the same standard when it comes to such actions.
15
Q
Categorical Imperative Strengths:
Straightforward Application
3
A
- Straightforward to apply
- Carefully articulated steps make the results of the test consistent from person to person, no matter who applies it
- Rational beings can understand which maxims are logically possible, and we share a basic understanding of certain maxims that we would not will to live under.
16
Q
Categorical Imperative Strengths:
Respect for People & Rights
2
A
- Ties into positive modern views of the world
- Emphasis on how we should treat people with respect is agreeable - Many think that humans are worthy of respect and therefore deserve rights, like the right to freedom or right to life.
17
Q
Categorical Imperative Strengths:
Leniancy
2
A
- The concept of imperfect duties allows for some leniency in Kant’s theory and a consideration of circumstances
- We will come across scenarios in which we simply cannot act on our duty, and Kant’s allowance for this via imperfect duties makes his theory more realistic to apply and fits in with the complexity of human life.
18
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Formulation of Maxims
2
A
- Users can perfectly formulate a maxim to pass the test
- Example: ‘always eat healthily’ would pass the test, but seems more of a prudent principle than something worthy of becoming a moral law
19
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Formulation of Maxims - Counter Argument
3
A
- This maxim could be argued as a hypothetical imperative as there is a hidden proviso – always eat healthily if you want to live a long life
- Hypothetical imperatives aren’t morally worthy since they are based on consequences and specific goals.
- This weakness can also be argued as a misunderstanding of the categorical imperative test’s purpose - the test shouldn’t be primarily used to identify obligatory actions, but to rule out non-obligatory ones.
20
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Universal Maxims
5
A
- Lack of guidance in Kant’s theory as to what counts as a universal maxim
- It is possible to articulate maxims in a way that they only apply to one person or specific people even though they are phrased in a particular way,
- Example: “don’t cheat in exams unless you have red hair.”
- Maxim is universalisable, but in reality, it would only modify the behaviour of some or one individual.
- Therefore, perhaps the categorical imperative isn’t as consistent and may not always aid us in creating absolute moral laws which are worthy and applicable to all
21
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Consideration of Consequences
4
A
- Contradiction in will has us consider consequences
- Example: if we are considering if ‘always lie’ is a contradiction in will, we have to consider the impact that always lying has on our society
- Kant deems consequences as irrelevant, but he smuggles them into his theory as we are evaluating if something should be a moral law by its effect if followed by society
- Makes a key feature of his theory unreliable - if Kant can’t follow his own words or tailor his theory to align with them, how can we?
22
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Conflicting Duties
3
A
- Lack of guidance as to what we should do if our duties conflict
- Little exception since Kant insists we must never deviate from perfect duties, but it is easy to encounter scenarios where we are forced to deviate from one duty to follow another
- Example: a friend asks you to not tell his parents he snuck out to a party without permission, but his parents later approach you to ask why your friend has been so secretive; left without a solution when we have an unconditional duty to never lie but an unconditional duty to keep promises
23
Q
Categorical Imperative Weaknesses:
Conflicting Duties - Counter Argument
5
A
- Kant responds via enquiring murder scenario - telling the truth facilitates the murder but lying goes against moral law, and we cannot say nothing as we are also obligated to tell the truth
- Kant says we must tell the truth as lying could inadvertently lead the killer to the victim if they had left the house
- However, response shows consideration of consequences so it does not work as a solution to the weakness
- Lack of guidance on universalised maxims could act as a solution, but using such logic means we could justify anything
- Also not practical to universalise a maxim to pass the test as we are experiencing the scenario in the moment
