A moral framework for rights: Should you lie to Nazi's? Every action we take invloves love and compassion because we are human beings. The fact that the terrorist has a bad will to use everyone in the city only as a means does not allow you to do the same.
But Kant and the rest of us are repulsed by the idea, and rightfully so. If the Nazi beliefs are true, then one truly ought to exterminate all Jews.
Reason doesn't motivate moral action. I'm only trying to help people. We cannot assume what is good for us is good for everyone else- Kant's equivalent of the Golden Rule It aims to treat everyone fairly and justly so corrects utilitarian idea that some can suffer as long as others are happy Kant sees humans as being of intrinsic worth as they are the rational high point of creation.
Hume says we need to have a desire or an inclination to do the right action, even if we know that it's the right action.
Joe is terminally ill with some nasty cancer in the opinion of two doctors, and is in a lot of pain, at the legal limit of painkillers. The things you didn't do but could have done to maximize happiness; and b.
Would we think this is a good theory with which to handle or raise children? Utilitarianism does not rigidly label actions as absolutely right or wrong though certain actions like lying will in general be wrongand it allows flexibility and sensitivity to the circumstances surrounding an action.
Therefore, Utilitarianism says you should murder the rotten professor. It links happiness with morality, instead of possibly pitting happiness against morality such as Kant's view.
If every human has intrinsic worth as Kant believesthen every human should have the same rights, other things being equal. Is reason sufficient to motivate us to do our duty? It'sand you're hiding Jews in a cellar. How can Kant deal with these hard cases? You have access to the child of a ruthless terrorist who has a nuclear weapon aimed at your city.Jun 27, · Problems with Kant’s Categorical Imperative Posted on June 27, by humblesmith In his book Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, philosopher Immanuel Kant gives a succinct definition of his basis for morals, which he calls the categorical imperative.
Pros And Cons Of Categorical Imperative The Pros and Cons of the “Technological Imperative ” March 20 Technological advances have been gaining more and more information over the past years and by doing so, they are able to advance their technology each and everyd ay.
Pros: Cons: It is rational (i.e.
people can use logic to determine if the reason for their actions meets one of the Categorical Imperatives) There is no way to resolve a conflict between rules It produces universal moral guidelines Sometimes a single rule is not enough All people are moral equals and deserve to be treated similarly Is it a %(6).
Categorical imperative tells us exactly what is right and wrong, giving us a clear sense of moral guidelines Kant draws a clear distinction between duty and preference Moral value of an action comes from it's intrinsic rightness so issues of teleological ethics are avoided.
What pros and cons do you see in the Categorical Imperative theory of decision making? About Kant Categorical Imperative Ethical Systems Bibliography The Three Maxims of Kant's Categorical Imperative: 1st Maxim: "act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.".Download