LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3.

FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION

FRAMEWORKS

Module 10

Kant and the Rights Theorists

“Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing
admiration and awe…the ember in the stars
and the moral law within.” -Kant

INTRODUCTION

In the last module, we have discussed about Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. Both of
them were talking about virtues. Man should live a virtuous kind of life. Aristotle was
talking about virtue in the context of the attainment of happiness as our ultimate end.
St. Thomas on the other hand was talking the same virtue in the light of faith in God as
the author to the Divine Law. We have the conscience that reminds us to do good and
avoid evil.

In this module, we move our perspective from the ancient and medieval thoughts about
moral living to a modern perspective of Immanuel Kant. Kant will tell us his
philosophical idea of duty as applied to our daily actions.

Prepared by Noel N Pit 1|Page

LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

OBJECTIVES

At the end of this module, you should be able to:

1. Explain the categorical imperative;

2. Appreciate and articulate the role of duty in crafting an ethical life; and
3. Apply the principle of the categorical imperative in moral dilemma.

DISCUSSION
How many times in your life were you able to follow your duty? What is your duty as a
son or daughter of your parents? What is your duty as a student? What is your duty as
a Christian and as a Catholic?

All of these questions pertain to duty. Why? This might be your question. That’s a
good question then. For Kant, morality must stem from duty. Another, why? That will
be the focus of our discussion in this module. But before we go further, may be it is
better for to introduce to you first, the philosopher, Immanuel Kant.

IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804)

 German philosopher from Konigsberg, East Prussia
 Wrote among other things, Critique of Pure Reason (1781), The Fundamental
Principles of/Foundations of/Groundwork of/ Grounding for the Metaphysics of
Morals (1875), Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and Critique of Judgment
(1790)

I would like to use the same question in the book of Pasco (Ethics, p.60) by asking you
the question, “If early morning tomorrow you wake up so sure that there is no God, what
would you do?”

“The German thinker Immanuel Kant proposed a viable solution to this quandary. His
philosophy views man as autonomous and most of himself/herself as not subject to
external conditions, results, and mandates. If left to himself/herself, is it possible for the
human person to be ethical? Immanuel Kant thinks so. In fact, he was so confident in
the ethical system that he came up with what he declares its systematic independence
from religion and even asserted that it is religion that is in need of his foundational
ethics and not vice versa.” (Pasco, et al., Ethics)

Prepared by Noel N Pit 2|Page

LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

“Kant asserts that morality is a pure philosophy. For him, philosophy can be divided
either on the basis of experience or on the basis of what is a priori. A philosophy which
is based on experience is for Kant empirical, while a philosophy which is based on a
priori principles is pure philosophy.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical Discipline of
Action)

“…ethics for the thinker is both empirical and rational. No wonder Kant contends that
the basis of morality is nothing else but reason. Thus, ethics cannot be used as a
synonym for morality. To be consistent, he uses morals, instead of ethics. (Babor,
Ethics, the Philosophical Discipline of Action)

“Kant insists that every time we confront moral situations there are formally operative a
priori that can be brought into the fore. Highlighting these a priori truths can better help
the learners of ethics sort through his/her task of living ethically. Kant’s research on
ethics has named these as reason, goodwill, and duty. These are for Kant,
respectively, the foundation (reason), source (goodwill), and motivation (duty) of ethical
living.” (Pasco, et al., Ethics)

“The foundation of a sound ethics for Immanuel Kant can only be the authority of human
reason. The voice of God is not heard directly today while man is living in this passing
world. Voices of ministers and priests who claim to speak for God are but other human
beings who make use of their own reason in trying to understand what goes on around
them. This common human reason is also what they use as they comprehend the
revelation that is said to be the foundation of their particular religion. Given that they
share the same humanity with everybody else including the students of ethics, what
they say ought to pass through the norm of reason that is eternal to the moral subject
himself/herself. Otherwise, arbitrariness holds sway in their claim to authority and what
they capriciously hold as binding or gratuitously free.” (Pasco, et al., Ethics)

“Because Kantian morality is founded on reason, Kant keeps on pounding the idea of
the good will, motive, and duty. For Kant, to live a moral life is to live in accordance with
the laws of reason. Kant argues that the command is true and binding because it is
beyond experience.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical Discipline of Action)

“…Reason for Kant is not the terminal point of life, rather, it leads to the cultivation of
the good will. This means that, for Kant, in order to live in accordance with the laws of
reason, one must live in accordance with the laws of nature….the will is the determining
factor of the righteousness of human conduct…Therefore, the will should be a good
will…a good will is one that acts for the sake of duty.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical
Discipline of Action)

Prepared by Noel N Pit 3|Page

LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

“The person who acts in accordance to drawn-up lists of what one should do complies
through the use of his/her reason that they are indeed an obligation for hi (m)/her. The
reason, therefore, elects such and such as morally binding and thus in accordance with
what he/she thinks is so. His/her reason therefore, functions as the very effort to think
through moral principles and apply what he/she knows to get to the right thing to do.”
(Pasco, et al., Ethics)

SENTENCE COMPLETION ACTIVITY 1-1

Directions: Below are incomplete sentences. Please complete the sentences by

supplying the missing idea or ideas.

Example:

Man, as viewed by Kant, is an autonomous entity because ____.

My answer: Man, as viewed by Kant, is an autonomous entity because he is not a

subject to external conditions or results.

Now, you may start!

1. The authority of human reason is considered by Kant as ____.

2. Living a moral life is ____.
3. A philosophy is a pure philosophy when ____.
4. Man when left to himself can still be ethical because ____.
5. Reason cultivates _____.
6. A sound ethics must be founded on ______.
7. The will functions as the ______.

Reason and Will

“Kant posits his claim that reason is capable of influencing the will. But, what is Kant’s
understanding of the will? According to Kant, the will is the determining factor of the
righteousness of human conduct. There, the will should be a good will….Thus, a
goodwill is one that acts for the sake of duty. The philosopher did not deny that we
have intelligence, wit, judgment, courage, and other natural mental talents. But for
Kant, all these can be used to promote evil.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical
Discipline of Action)

Prepared by Noel N Pit 4|Page

LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

“Kant says that the discussion on the will does not suffice. That is why he also
investigates the motive behind the will. … motive determines the moral quality of an act
and not the consequences of the act. …it is the intention behind our acts that matter
and not the consequences of the act…the motive in moral acts cannot be happiness,
pleasure, God, or religion, but duty. The measure of the good motive or will or intention
is in the context of duty…Kantian morality can be qualified as an Ethics of Duty; and as
such it excludes pleasure, happiness, and God.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical
Discipline of Action)

“Man should never act morally because man wants to be pleased or to be happy with
his actions nor should man act morally because there is God who will reward his good
actions in the afterlife, but man should act morally because it is his duty.” (Babor, Ethics,
the Philosophical Discipline of Action)

“Kant calls “duty” the obligation that follows what reason deems as the action which is
most worthy of our humanity. This duty is founded on human reason, that is, it passes
through the sorting out made by our autonomous discursive reason. Our duty is that
which the reason determines as our obligation. …Duty or obligation is the motivation for
reason and goodwill of the human person.” (Pasco, et al., Ethics)

Kant: “Duty is the obligation to act from reverence, respect for, and obedience to the
moral law.”

“Kant contends that the will to perform an act is not governed by desire or inclination.,
duty therefore is absolute and unconditional. Because duty is founded on man’s
reverence for the moral law, the moral law should be revered. According to Kant, the
moral law on duty is a categorical or absolute command. That is why he calls his brand
of morality categorical imperative…. This categorical imperative is not derived from
experience because it is a priori. Aside from being a priori, the categorical imperative is
also an apodictic practical principle, in the sense that it affirms that an action is
objectively necessary without regard to an end.” (Babor, Ethics, the Philosophical
Discipline of Action)

Categorical Imperative is founded on Two Principles:

Principle of Universality- “Act only on that maxim whereby you can, at the same time,
will that it should become a universal law”

The imperative of duty then: “Act as if the maxim of your action were to become by your
will a universal law of nature.”

Principle of Humanity: “So act as to treat humanity whether in your person or in that of
another never as means but always as an end.”
Prepared by Noel N Pit 5|Page
LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

Critique of Kantian Ethics

 Man, as a rational being, imposes the moral law upon himself. This implies that
the moral law is man’s own creation, not God’s.
 Kant misses to reflect that human reason does not and cannot make a moral law.
Instead, it only discovers it. Based on Thomistic ethics and Scholasticism, the
moral law comes from the Natural Law and the latter comes from God’s Eternal
Law.

STUDENT ACTIVITY 10-1

You read an online newspaper for 3 days and identify a moral issue where you can use
the categorical imperative to discern the duty of the persons involved. You write your
answer in a form of one-page Reflection Paper.

STUDENT ACTIVITY 10-2

Can you still remember the case of Lucky in the Placebo Effect? Use the seven step
model to solve the moral dilemma. Using categorical imperative as your moral
framework, deliberate the duty of Lucky to the hospital and to his brother.

TIPS ON MAKING STUDENT ACTIVITY 10-2

 Read the case of Luck in the case entitled Placebo Effect

 Go back to the discussion of the seven step model for moral decision making
 Know the ethical issues of Lucky or the moral dilemma of Lucky
 Follow the steps of the model
 Use categorical imperative as you principle.

Prepared by Noel N Pit 6|Page

LC GEC 18 COURSE MANUAL UNIT3. FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
FRAMEWORKS

REFERENCES

Agapay, R (1991). Ethics and the Filipino: A Manual on Morals for Students and
Educators. Mandaluyong City: National Book Store.

Babor, E (2000). Ethics: The Philosophical Discipline of Action. Manila: Rex Book
Store.

Cariňo, J. (2018). Fundamentals of Ethics. Quezon City: C and E Publishing, Inc.

Dy, M. Jr. (2003). Philosophy of Man: Selected Readings 2nd Edition. Manila:
Goodwill Book Store.

General Education Training (Ethics) Manual for Second Generation. Commission on

Higher Education.

Glenn, P. (1968). Ethics: A Class Manual in Moral Philosophy. London: B. Herder

Book Co.

Kolhberg, L. (1981). Essays on Moral Development. The Philosophy of Moral

Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice, Volume 1. San Francisco,
CA: Harper and Row.

Licuanan, P et al. A Moral Recovery Program: Building a People-Building a Nation. In

Values in Philippine Culture and Education: Philippine Philosophical Studies I,
edited by Manuel B Dy, Jr. 31-48. Washington, DC: The Council for Research
in Values and Philosophy, 1994.

Pasco, M.O., Fulente Suarez, V., and Rodriguez, A.M. (2018). Ethics. Quezon City: C
and E Publishing, Inc.

Prepared by Noel N Pit 7|Page