Custom Kant’s Moral Theory of Deontology essay writing
The development of these ideas by Kant are then considered and compared to those of Hume with a discussion as to which may be seen as the most accurate.
Kant s Deontology Essay - 1083 Words
Kant ran into a problem with his theory that the mind plays a part in producing objective knowledge. Intuitions and categories are entirely disparate, so how can they interact? Kant’s solution is the schema: a priori principles by which the transcendental imagination connects concepts with intuitions through time. All the principles are temporally bound, for if a concept is purely a priori, as the categories are, then they must apply for all times. Hence there are principles such assubstance is that which endures through time, and the cause must always be prior to the effect.
When evaluating morality, there are two principals of ethical theories that can be contrasted. These theories are deontological ethics and teleological ethics. While teleological ethics focuses on moral acts in order to achieve some sort of end, deontological ethics argues that morality is an obligation and is not reducible to a creation of good consequences. Given these distinctively opposite characteristics, it is obvious that when viewing morally relevant situations that the methods of approaching them will conflict as well. Not only will these differences depend on the deontological or the teleological ethicist point of view, but opinions will also vary when surreptitiously observing the egoist, the altruist, and the universalist.
Immanual Kant Deontology Presentation Essays - …
Utilizes the Platonic model from Plato's Republic, John Stewart Mill's theory of utilitarianism, and Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative of reason to illustrate this contention.
Kant deontology essays - Kris Finger, CMM
When comparing teleological and deontological ethics, it is obvious that each method opposes the other, and can possibly be argued that each embraces their own unique flaws. In the example of killing, a teleological approach to morality could be said to be a little too far on the flexible side. For if all people were able to make decisions based on their own evaluation of different circumstances, a question would arise as to who decides when exceptions can be made and when they can’t.
Deontology Essays: Examples, Topics, Titles, & Outlines
Explores the opinions of Pythagoras, Socrates, Kant, Mill, and others to determine if their is a common consensus of the morality of taking another life as a matter of punishment of one's deeds.
Kant's Deontology Summary Flashcards | Quizlet
On the contrary, when debating the views of the deontological ethicist, one might say that this approach is too extreme. Going back to the example of killing, it is highly unlikely that a rational being would view killing in self-defense as immoral. For if you were being held hostage by a renowned serial killer whom you knew had no family or friends to miss him and that he himself did not even value his own life (and you could conclude this one hundred percent), could one rationally argue that killing him before he takes your life would be wrong and immoral? Depending on which view you approach this moral dilemma with will determine your standpoint.
Kant argued that duty and reason alone should guide our emotions
Judgments are, for Kant, the preconditions of any thought. Man thinks via judgments, so all possible judgments must be listed and the perceptions connected within them put aside, so as to make it possible to examine the moments whenthe understanding is engaged in constructing judgments. For the categories are equivalent to these moments, in that they are concepts of intuitions in general, so far as they are determined by these moments universally and necessarily. Thus by listing all the moments, one can deduce from them all of the categories.
One may now ask: How many possible judgments are there? Kant believed that all the possible propositions within Aristotle’s syllogistic logic are equivalent to all possible judgments, and that all the logical operators within the propositions are equivalent to the moments of the understanding within judgments. Thus he listed Aristotle’s system in four groups of three: quantity (universal, particular, singular), quality (affirmative, negative, infinite), relation (categorical, hypothetical, disjunctive) and modality (problematic, assertoric, apodeictic). The parallelism with Kant’s categories is obvious: quantity (unity, plurality, totality), quality (reality, negation, limitation), relation (substance, cause, community) and modality (possibility, existence, necessity).
The fundamental building blocks of experience, i.e. objective knowledge, are now in place. First there is the sensibility, which supplies the mind with intuitions, and then there is the understanding, which produces judgments of these intuitions and can subsume them under categories. These categories lift the intuitions up out of the subject’s current state of consciousness and place them within consciousness in general, producing universally necessary knowledge. For the categories are innate in any rational being, so any intuition thought within a category in one mind will necessarily be subsumed and understood identically in any mind. In other words we filter what we see and hear.