Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Activity No. 6
Activity No. 6
Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time
will that it become a universal law.” In lay terms, this simply means that if you
do an action, then everyone else should also be able to do.
Cite at least five(5) examples of morally right human action that demonstrates the
possibility that it can be performed by others. Show the maxim (rule of action) applied
in the human action. 5 pts.
Example: 1. She told her friend to stop cheating during the test. Maxim: Honesty
is the best policy.
Think and use other maxim and examples. The maxim above is already taken.
2. One of the problem of Kant's categorical theory: The theory applies only to
rational agents. It would not apply to non-humans or to humans who are not
rational, e.g., humans with brain malfunctioning, illness or persistent vegetative
coma.
In what way can we do good actions even if Kant's ethics of duty won't work with
humans with brain malfunctioning, illness,or persistent vegetative coma? 5 pts.
Kant's ethics of duty is a moral theory that states that we ought to perform our
duties. Duty is a concept that Kant defines as "the idea of doing something
because it is right in itself." We have a duty to do good things, because they are
good in themselves. In this way, we can do good actions even if Kant's ethics of
duty won't work with humans with brain malfunctioning, illness,or persistent
vegetative coma.
If our actions are not working well in the world, we might not be able to tell what is
right and what is wrong. However, there should be a clear distinction between
right and wrong. If an action is right or wrong depends on whether it helps or
hurts people around us or not. If someone does something for you but it doesn't
help them too much at all then perhaps it wasn't such a good deed after all. That
person may have just been doing something out of obligation rather than from
love for you or your well-being.
3. One weakness of the categorical imperative: It is not flexible idea. each situation
is different thus the categorical imperative does not work, if you are saying lying
is morally wrong but a situation suggests that lying is the morally better thing to
do one must lie. we like to look at the end result too much rather then the person
and the morality of it.
Let's say a Stranger is asking for your friend's whereabouts. You have the feeling that
your friend's life might be in danger, but, you know where your friend is. Will you lie or
tell the truth to the stranger where your friend is? If you are Immanuel Kant how will
you defend and justify your answer? 5 pts.
Kant did not believe that there was any morally correct way to lie. He held
that even in extreme cases of an “Inquiring Murderer” we must still tell the truth.
Even if lying to that “Inquiring Murderer” could save someone's life, telling the
truth is the morally right thing to do.
If you have the feeling that someone's life might be in danger, and if you know
where your friend is, then it is best not to tell the stranger where he or she can
find your friend. However, if your friend is in danger and the stranger knows this
information already, then telling him or her where your friend is might save that
person's life.
If we assume that lying is wrong, then we should tell the truth because there is no
point in lying when one can get killed anyway if they are caught. However, if
lying is not wrong, then we should lie and save a person from getting killed by
the Stranger.
Kant thinks that it is always better to tell the truth than it would be to lie and risk
getting caught in the lie.