Kant’s Categorical Imperative and Euthanasia

1. Kant’s Categorical Imperative and Euthanasia Michael Lacewing enquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk

2. Deontology • Morality is a matter of duty. • Whether something is right or wrong doesn’t depend on its consequences. Actions are right or wrong in themselves. • Different answers to how we can discover our duties; Kant says ‘pure reason’ • Actions are defined by intentions, e.g. the difference between murder and killing in self-defence.

3. Kant’s Categorical Imperative • Morality is meant to guide our actions. • We act on maxims: principle of action, what we intend. • Morality is universal, the same for everyone. • so “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”. • E.g. stealing: If we could all just help ourselves to whatever we wanted, the idea of ‘owning’ things would disappear; but then no one would be able to steal.

4. Imperatives • An imperative is just a command. • A hypothetical imperative is a command that presupposes some further goal or end. • A categorical imperative is not hypothetical. It is irrational and immoral not to obey it.

5. Happiness and reason • Only reason and happiness motivate us. Morality motivates us, so must be one of these. • It can’t be happiness, since what makes people happy differs, and happiness can be good or bad. • It is reason: morality is universal and categorical - so is reason.

6. Respecting humanity • ‘Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’ • To treat someone’s humanity simply as a means, and not also as an end, is to treat the person in a way that undermines their power of making a rational choice themselves.

7. Euthanasia • Involuntary, non-voluntary, voluntary • Kant: people who commit suicide destroy their rationality to avoid pain - i.e. they treat it as a means to an end; so euthanasia (to avoid pain) is wrong • What if you ask for euthanasia because you will lose your rationality, e.g. Alzheimer’s? Do we respect their dignity by giving them euthanasia?

8. Active v. passive euthanasia • Act utilitarianism: all that matters is suffering • Deontology: killing someone is different from letting them die. We shouldn’t kill people, but are not always required to prevent them from doing. • Can we kill people in euthanasia? Sanctity of life says no, and many doctors are reluctant

9. Objections • Any action can be justified, as long as we phrase the maxim cleverly. • But the test is what our maxim really is. • Conflict of duties • Duties never really conflict, but knowing how to apply the CI requires judgment. • Strange results: ‘I shall never sell, but only buy’ is immoral!