Tuesday, June 24, 2025

1195: De Categrorical Imperative of Immanuel Kant

 What intrigues me is how we see our history as mankind. The most important feature may be the phenomenon that the course of history apparently is shaped by the actions of individual persons.

   

We see this everywhere, in science, politics, visual art, music, philosophy, technology, you name it and there always is that one great mind that sets the course and direction.

   

One condition to make this happen is, that there must be a fertile and supportive tendency in society, sothat the new ideas can blossom.

   

But it often is just one individual that leaves deep traces in history and in our way of looking at the world and ourselves. This definitely applies to moral philosophy and again it boils down to the basic philosophical question:

   

what gets priority as the basic source of knowledge: our senses or our ratio?

   

In our search to find a way to decide what is roght and wrong, good and bad, we saw that the utilitarian moral philosophy chooses for empirical principles based on pain and pleasure.

   

The most basic aim of moral philosophy, is, in Immanuel Kant’s rationalist view, to “seek out” the foundational principle of a “metaphysics of morals,”

      

which Kant understands as a system of a priori moral principles that apply to human persons in all times and cultures. A priori means that the knowledge primarily originates from the ratio.

    

In fact develops Kant a philosophical underpinning for what most people feel and believe: namely the fact that some things you just don't do, while there are other thingsyou always should do.

    

To put it in a philosophical and Kantian way: According to Kant, rational beings occupy a special place in creation, and morality can be summed up 

  

in an imperative, or ultimate commandment of reason, from which all duties and obligations derive. He defines an imperative as any proposition declaring a certain action or inaction to be necessary.

       

Hypothetical imperatives apply to someone who wishes to attain certain ends. For example, "I must drink something to quench my thirst" or "I must study to pass this exam."

   

The Categorical Imperative, on the other hand, commands immediately categorical requirements, denoting an absolute, unconditional requirement 

  

that must be obeyed in all circumstances and is justified as an end in itself, possessing intrinsic value beyond simply being desirable.

   

Kant formulated it in several ways.  One way was "Act only according to that maxim, subjective rule, whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." 

   

This means that one's actions should be based on principles that could be applied to everyone without contradiction.

    

Another formulation was:  "So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end."

   

The Categorical Imperative strives for objectivity. It's not about what you would want, but what could rationally be willed as a universal law for everyone. This attempts to remove the subjectivity inherent in the Golden Rule.

   

For Kant, morally worthy actions are motivated by duty – acting out of respect for the moral law itself, not out of inclination, self-interest, or even empathy alone.

    

In the next lecture I'll compare Kant's Categorical Imperative with The Golden Rule. At first glance they maylook the same, but the differences are very instructive,

   

Thank you for your attention... the floor is yours...

 

  


No comments:

Post a Comment