1 / 14

Kant (2)

Kant (2). The Categorical Imperative. Imperatives. An imperative represents an action as something good to do Hypothetical: good if you take some end as good (good as a means) Categorical: good in itself. Morality gives us categorical imperatives.

rich
Download Presentation

Kant (2)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Kant (2) The Categorical Imperative

  2. Imperatives • An imperative represents an action as something good to do • Hypothetical: good if you take some end as good (good as a means) • Categorical: good in itself

  3. Morality gives us categorical imperatives • If moral law contained only hypothetical imperatives, then our reason to comply would derive from some end we were trying to accomplish. • But then there would be no such thing as a good will • Hence morality must give us categorical imperatives

  4. “The” Categorical Imperative • General principle of practical reason underlying all categorical imperatives • General idea: act only on principles acceptable to all rational beings • Formulation: “Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”

  5. The “CI Procedure” • Step 1: Propose a maxim • Step 2: Generalize it • Step 3: Transform it into a law of nature • Step4: Figure out the Perturbed Social World • Q1: Could I rationally act on my maxim in the PSW? • Q2: Could I rationally choose to live in the PSW?

  6. Step 1: Propose a maxim • I am to do x in circumstances y in order to bring about z. • I am to lie on a loan application when I am in severe financial difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds, in order to ease the strain on my finances. • Note: the proposal should be sincere • Note: the maxim should be instrumentally rational

  7. Step 2: Generalize the maxim • Everyone is to do x in circumstances y in order to bring about z. • Everyone is to lie on a loan application when he is in severe financial difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds, in order to ease the strain on his finances

  8. Step 3: Transform it into a law of nature • Everyone always does x in circumstances y in order to bring about z • Everyone always lies on a loan application when he is in severe financial difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds, in order to ease the strain on his finances.

  9. Step 4: Figure out the Perturbed Social World • What would the world be like with the new law of nature? • Note: assume that in the PSW the new law is common knowledge • What would the world be like if it were common knowledge that everyone always lied on a loan application when ...

  10. Q1: Could I rationally act on my maxim in the PSW? • “Rationally” means instrumental rationality • In the PSW, would doing x in circumstances y still be an effective means of achieving z? • In the PSW, would lying on a loan application when I am in severe financial difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds still be an effective means of easing the strain on my finances?

  11. Q2: Could I rationally choose to live in the PSW? • Don’t ask this question if you get a no answer to Q1 • Q1: “contradiction in conception” test • Q2: “contradiction in the will” test

  12. Maxim of indifference to the needs of others • In order to advance my own interests, I will not do anything to help others in need unless I have something to gain from doing so. • X = refraining from helping someone in need • y = I don’t have anything to gain from helping • z = advancement of my own interests

  13. Contradiction in conception? • In the PSW, would refraining from helping when I have nothing to gain still be an effective way of promoting my own interests? • Answer seems yes

  14. Contradiction in the will? • Could I rationally choose the PSW as a world to live in? • Kant says no: I would be choosing not to be helped when in need unless it was in someone’s interest to do so, and this is not rational.

More Related