Scribd
Upload
40 views22 pages

Topic 11 Kant and Right Theory

This document discusses Kant's theory of deontology and rights. It summarizes that for Kant, an action is only good if it is done from a sense of duty as dictated by reason alone. Kant believed that people have moral rights that exist independently of legal rights. The document differentiates between Kant's categorical imperative, which demands actions without qualification, and hypothetical imperatives, which state that if you want to attain an end, act in a certain way. It also discusses the differences between legal rights established by laws and moral rights that are believed to exist prior to and independently of legal systems.

Uploaded by

202030166
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
40 views22 pages

Topic 11 Kant and Right Theory

This document discusses Kant's theory of deontology and rights. It summarizes that for Kant, an action is only good if it is done from a sense of duty as dictated by reason alone. Kant believed that people have moral rights that exist independently of legal rights. The document differentiates between Kant's categorical imperative, which demands actions without qualification, and hypothetical imperatives, which state that if you want to attain an end, act in a certain way. It also discusses the differences between legal rights established by laws and moral rights that are believed to exist prior to and independently of legal systems.

Uploaded by

202030166
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 22

Lesson VII:

Kant and Rights Theory


Lecturer:
PROF. RESTIE ALLAN A. PUNO, MAEd, LPT
Dean, College of Arts and Humanities, PSU
Lesson Objectives:

• To discuss what is good will and acting from a sense of duty.

• To compare and contrast Hypothetical and Categorical


Imperatives.

• To explain the Rights theory.

• To differentiate a legal from a moral Right.


IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804)

❖ German philosopher
• Birth date: April 22, 1724
• He was born at Konigsberd, Russia
• Kant’s last words are reported to have
been “Es ist gut” (“It is good”).

Contributions to Philosophy:
• The Foundations of the Metaphysics of
Morals
• Critique of Practical Reason
Deontological Theory
❖Deontology derived from the greek word “deon” meaning
“duty”.
❖Deontology is a category of normative ethical theories that
encompasses any theory which is primarily concerned with
adherence to certain rules or duties.
❖ The theory that the morality of an action should be based on
whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of
rules, rather than based on the consequences of an action.
❖“I am acting a certain way only if I act for the right reason.”
Kantian Ethics
❖ Kant’s theory is an example of a deontological moral theory
– according to these theories, the rightness or wrongness of
actions does not depend on their consequences but on
whether they fulfill our duty.

❖Kant categorically rejects that ethical judgements are based


on feelings.

❖Reason, for him, is what deems an action ethical or otherwise.


Good Will
❖When we wish to determine the moral status of an action, we
consult reason.
❖The functions and capacities of our reason is to produce good
will.
❖He does not agree with many ethicists that happiness is the
summum bonum or the highest good.
❖A good will is one that habitually rightly.
❖A good will is a result of a person’s act from a sense of duty.
❖Voluntary
❖Not done for inclination.
Who is good person or a person of good
will?
❖For Kant, it is the person who acts from a sense of duty.

❖Kant thinks that acting from a sense of duty means exhibiting


good will even in the face of difficulty.

❖It must be an act done not from ‘Inclination’ but from a ‘Sense
of duty’ dictated by reason.

❖Inclination – refers to the feeling that pushes us to select a


particular option or make a particular decision.
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES
is a general rule or principle
which serves as a guide to
action.

❖It is one’s duty, as rational being to act on principle or maxim, as


contrasted to simply acting on impulse.

a sudden strong and unreflective


urge or desire to act.

❖Kant characterized the CI as an objective, rationally necessary


and unconditional principle that we must always follow despite
any natural desires or inclinations we may have to contrary.
Actions on Impulse Actions on Maxim
Example: Example:

Suppose a man wants to financially A man who gives relief to total


help a certain lady who is in need, strangers who are victims of a calamity.
merely because he likes her Because he accepts it as his duty to
personally, and he might not want to provide support to those in need, he
give the same assistance to another treats in precisely the same manner
woman in an exactly similar situation any other person whose situation has
because he does not happen to like the same characteristics.
her.
Maxims of Conduct
Hypothetical Imperatives Categorical Imperatives

❖ It is how reason orders one to ❖ It demands actions without


achieve one’s specific ends. qualification.
❖ Some hypothetical imperatives are ❖ “No matter what end you desire to
concerned with mere prudential attain, act in such-and-such a way”.
actions.
❖ Kant’s moral philosophy that an act
❖ Hypothetical imperative states, “If is morally good if it is done for the
you want to attain a certain end, act sake of a morally good maxim; and
in such-and-such a way”. a maxim is morally good if it
conforms to the categorical
imperative.

❖ Universalizability and End-in-itself


1. Formulation

-Universalizability
A rule or principle of action

“Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time
will that it should become a universal law.
Something that must always
be done in similar situation
Example:
A person, having run out of money, may be tempted to borrow
from someone though knowing for sure that he will be
incapable to pay it back. He is thus acting on the maxim, “When
in need of money, borrow from someone by making a lying
promise.”
2. Formulation

End-in-itself
“So act as to use humanity, both in your own person and in the
person of every other, always at the same time as an end, never
simple as a means.”

Example:
The people in the ancient time became a slave to build a giant
building, the building is the end and the people is being used
as the mean. They being force against their will to build, this
would violent moral law, should not be permissible.
Analysis of Kantian Ethics
• It highlights the Golden rule, “ Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you”
• The end-in-itself version, instruct us to respect others
because that is how we treat ourselves.
• His view is deemed by some as a rule-bound moral
philosophy that puts a premium on the rules rather than
on humans.
• Kant’s ethics lacks solution to instances when there is
conflict of duties
• Having moral worth regardless of the consequences.
• Kant’s theory contradicts Aristotle.
Right Theory

The principle of right theory is the notion that in order for a


society to be efficacious, “Government must approach the
making and enforcement of laws with the right intentions in
respect to the end of goals of the society that it governs.
Members of society agree to give up some freedoms for the
protection enjoyed by organized society, but governments
cannot infringe upon the rights that citizens have been
promised.”
Right Based Ethics
❖The concept of rights based ethics is that “there are some
rights, both positive and negative, that all humans have based
only on the fact that they are human.
❖These rights can be natural and conventional.

❖Some ethical theorists defined the term ‘right’ as “Justified


claim that individuals and groups can make upon other
individuals or upon society; to have a right is to be in a position
to determine by one’s choices, what others should do or need to
do”
Legal rights vs. Moral rights
• What is legal is not always moral in a particular
country. (Vice versa)

❖Moral- what ought to be. (Natural Law)

❖Legal- rights that are “on the books.” (Conventional


Positive Law)
Legal Rights
• Recognized in law
• Vary with place and time
• May be too limited and extensive
Moral Rights
❖Are rights that “Exist prior to and independently from their
legal counterparts. The existence and validity of a moral right
is not deemed to be dependent upon the actions of jurists and
legislators.
THANK YOU!

“The only thing that is good without


qualification is a Good Will.”
-Immanuel Kant

You might also like