Ethics Week 13

Kant’s
Deontological
Ethics:
The Duty
Framework
Introduction
The term deontology comes
from the Greek
word deon, meaning duty.
The theory of deontology
states we are morally
obligated to act in
accordance with a certain set
of principles and rules
regardless of outcome.
In religious
deontology, the
principles derive from
divine commandment
so that under
religious laws, we are
morally obligated not
to steal, lie, or cheat.
Immanuel Kant, the theory’s
celebrated proponent,
formulated the most
influential form of a secular
deontological moral theory in
1788. Unlike religious
deontological theories, the
rules (or maxims) in Kant’s
deontological theory derive
from human reason.
To better understand deontology, compare it
to some opposing theories, such
as utilitarianism, which says we have an
obligation to take the course of action that
achieves the most positive outcome or
consequence. According the theory of utility,
the best consequence is happiness/pleasure,
because it is considered the
absolute good. Consequentialism tells us we
need to take into account the final
consequence of our action, even if the act itself
is not morally good.
Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant was born in
1724 in the Prussian city of
Königsberg. He essentially
spent his whole adult life at
the university and never truly
travelled outside of the city.
He only stopped working at
the university three years
before his death.
He was a philosopher
and scientist specializing
in many areas, including
mathematics,
astrophysics, geography
and anthropology. He
wrote several dense,
difficult-to-read but
highly influential texts
regarding metaphysics,
metaethics and practical
morality, science, history
and politics.
As with many scholars of his time, Kant’s
new ideas and published works about the
nature of reality and free will were widely
condemned, but they have remained
prominently influential to this day. In terms
of ethics, the most significant of his works
are Groundwork in the Metaphysics of
Morals (1785), Critique of Practical
Reason (1788), and Metaphysics of
Morals (1798). These texts constitute the
foundation of Kant’s own moral philosophy.
A Theory of Duty
• Moral agent: An agent is a
person who performs an
action; a moral agent is a
person with the capacity to act
morally.
• Maxim: rule or principle
• Will: the faculty of deciding,
choosing, or acting
Deontological theories
differ from utilitarian
theories in several key
ways. The most notable
difference is
utilitarianism aims at a
goal of greatest
happiness (or the best
consequence) and
justifies any act that
achieves that goal.
Deontological theories hold that some
acts are always wrong, even if the act
leads to an admirable outcome.
•Actions in deontology are always
judged independently of their
outcome.
•An act can be morally bad but may
unintentionally lead to a favorable
outcome.
No other animal
possesses such a
propensity for reasoned
thought and action, and
it is exactly this ability
that requires human
beings to act in
accordance with and for
the sake of moral law or
duty.
Kant believes
•human inclinations
•emotions and
•consequences
should play no role in moral action.
According to Kant, the
moral worth of an
action is determined
by the human will,
which is the only thing
in the world that can
be considered good
without qualification.
Categorical Imperatives
Categorical Imperative
• This is a requirement in Kantian
deontological theory that we should act
only according to the maxims that can be
regarded as universal laws, that is, we
should act only according to the maxims
that all people will follow.
The First Formulation of the Imperative
“Act only according to that maxim

whereby you can at the same time will
that it should become a universal law
without contradiction.”
– Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of Metaphysic of Morals
Kant states that a true
moral proposition
must not be tied to
any particular
conditions, including
the identity of the
person making the
decision.
Second, we have imperfect
duties, which are still based
on pure reason but allow
for interpretation regarding
how they are
performed. Because these
duties depend loosely on
the subjective preferences
of mankind, they are not as
strong as perfect duties but
are still morally binding
Unlike perfect duties, people do not attract
blame if they do not complete an imperfect
duty, but they receive praise if they complete it,
for they have gone beyond basic duty and
taken responsibility upon themselves.
Imperfect duties are circumstantial, meaning
that one can not reasonably exist in a constant
state of performing that duty.
• What differentiates perfect and imperfect
duties is that imperfect duties are never truly
completed.
The first
formulation of the
categorical
imperative appears
similar to the
Golden Rule: “Do
not impose on
others what you do
not wish for
yourself.”
The Second Formulation of
the Imperative
“Act in such a way that you treat
humanity, whether in your own person
or in the person of any other, never
merely as a means to an end but
always at the same time as an end.”
This imperative states
that every rational action
must be considered not
only a principle, but also
an end. Most ends are
subjective in nature
because they need only
be pursued if they are in
line with a hypothetical
imperative.
For an end to be
objective, it would
need to be pursued
categorically. The
free will is the
source of all
rational action.
Based on this, Kant derives the
second formulation from the first. A
person has a perfect duty not to use
themselves or others merely as a
means to some other end.
•For example, someone who owns
slaves would be asserting a moral
right to own a slave by asserting
their rights over another person.
In Kantian ethics, one
cannot treat another
person as a means to an
end. Under the second
formulation of the
categorical imperative, a
person must maintain her
moral duty to seek an end
that is equal for all
people.
The Third Formulation of
the Imperative
“Therefore, every rational being must

so act as if he were through his maxim
always a legislating member in the
universal kingdom of ends.”
A truly autonomous will
is not subjugated to any
interest; it is subject to
those laws it makes for
itself, but the will must
also regard those laws
as if others are bound by
the laws. If the laws are
not universal, they are
not laws of conduct at
all.
Using reasoned judgment we can apply
this formula to any maxim and discover
whether it is morally permissible under
deontological ethics.
•Let’s take, for example, the act of
picking flowers from the local park.
The flowers are very pretty, and one
may want to take some home.
If everyone were to do
this, there would be no
flowers left in the park,
and the act contradicts
the original motive for
picking the flowers. The
better option is to go to
a shop and order or
plant one’s own flowers.
There are a few acts that
are always forbidden,
such as lying, which
negatively
affects trust between
people and the meaning
of truth. This rule remains
the case even when lying
has advantageous or even
morally admirable
consequences.
Alternative Formulation of
Categorical Imperative
Kant expressed the categorical
imperative in a few different ways.
The most important of these is the
formula of humanity: “Act in such a
way that you treat humanity,
whether in your own person or in
the person of another, always at
the same time as an end and
never simply as a means.”
This is a personal
perspective on the same
moral theory. To fail to do
this would be to treat
others in a way that
contradicts the moral law.
• For example, if I steal a
book from a friend, I am
treating him as a means
only (to obtain a book).
It is true that everyone uses
people as a means to an end.
Bus/taxi-drivers get us where
we want to go; factory workers
are the means to producing
objects and ultimately profit for
their employer. But using
people only to get what we
want and consistently
disrespecting their human
worth is against moral law.
• Kant, Immanuel. 1785. “First Section: Transition from the
Common Rational Knowledge of Morals to the
Philosophical”, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals.
• https://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/kantian-duty-based-
deontological-ethics/

Ethics Week 13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethics Week 13

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethics Week 13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kant’s

“Act only according to that maxim

“Therefore, every rational being must

You might also like