Name – Sejal

Roll No – 1797

CouRSe – Ba (politiCal
SCieNCe) hoNouRS

SuBjeCt – modeRN
politiCal philoSophy

SemeSteR – 6th

yeaR – 3
 Assignment
Ques. Write about theory of immanuel
kant.
Introduction – Although all of Kant’s work develops his ethical
theory, it is most clearly defined in Groundwork of the Metaphysics
of Morals, Critique of Practical Reason, and Metaphysics of Morals
(the first two parts of Kant’s Religion within the Bounds of Bare
Reason also add to his ethical theory). Although the Groundwork of
the Metaphysics of Morals is important for understanding Kant’s
ethics, one gets an incomplete understanding of his ethics if one
only reads the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and
Critique of Practical Reason, or is not aware that his other ethical
writings discuss other important details about Kant’s moral
philosophy as a whole since “one is all the more misled if he is not
aware that they form only part of the picture.”
As part of the Enlightenment tradition, Kant based his ethical theory
on the belief that reason should be used to determine how people
ought to act.He did not attempt to prescribe specific action, but
instructed that reason should be used to determine how to behave.
Who was Immanuel Kant?
Immanuel Kant (Prussia, 1724-1804) was one of the most influential
intellectuals in the field of political philosophy. Today, justice
systems in democracies are fundamentally based on Kant’s
writings. The philosopher’s work provides a compelling account of a
single set of moral principles that can be used to design just
institutions for governing society perfectly. The United Nations,
formed centuries after Kant’s first book was published, is largely
based on his vision of an international government that binds
nation-states together and maintains peace.
Immanuel Kant:- (1724–1804) is the central figure
in modern philosophy. He synthesized early modern
rationalism and empiricism, set the terms for much of
nineteenth and twentieth century philosophy, and continues
to exercise a significant influence today in metaphysics,
epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, aesthetics, and
other fields. The fundamental idea of Kant’s “critical
philosophy” – especially in his three Critiques: the Critique
of Pure Reason (1781, 1787), the Critique of Practical
Reason (1788), and the Critique of the Power of Judgment
(1790) – is human autonomy. He argues that the human
understanding is the source of the general laws of nature
that structure all our experience; and that human reason
gives itself the moral law, which is our basis for belief in
God, freedom, and immortality. Therefore, scientific
knowledge, morality, and religious belief are mutually
consistent and secure because they all rest on the same
foundation of human autonomy, which is also the final end
of nature according to the teleological worldview of
reflecting judgment that Kant introduces to unify the
theoretical and practical parts of his philosophical system.

“Critique of the Kantian philosophy” (German: “Kritik

der Kantischen Philosophie”) is a criticism Arthur
Schopenhauer appended to the first volume of his
The World as Will and Representation (1818). He
wanted to show Immanuel Kant’s errors so that
 Kant’s merits would be appreciated and his
achievements furthered.
At the time he wrote his criticism, Schopenhauer was
acquainted only with the second (1787) edition of
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. When he later read
the first (1781) edition, he said that many of Kant’s
contradictions were not evident.

Period of the three Critiques of Immanuel Kant

1. The Critique of Pure Reason - In the Critique of
Pure Reason, Kant aims to show the limits of what can be
known by theoretical reason, and his strategy depends on
a distinction between phenomena (objects as we
experience them) and noumena (objects as they exist in
themselves). In one sense, Kant chastens the ambitions
of reason. Because all knowledge is structured by the
categories of the understanding, we must forego
knowledge of things-in-themselves. However, knowledge
of these categories also allows us to draw a priori
generalizations about the phenomenal world. For
example, we know that the natural world is governed by
the principle of causality because causality is a form of
knowledge. By confining his conclusions to the world of
experience, Kant is able to meet the threat of Humean
skepticism and put natural science on a firm foundation.
 2. The Critique of Practical Reason of Immanuel
Kant – the Critique of Practical Reason was also
intended to develop his account of the will as
determinable by (or able to act from) the moral law alone,
place his ethical views within the larger framework of his
system of critical philosophy, and expand on certain
themes in his moral philosophy such as the feeling of
respect for the moral law and the concept of the “highest
good”.

3. The Critique of Judgment of Immanuel Kant- The

Critique of Judgment constitutes a discussion of the
place of Judgment itself, which must overlap both the
Understanding (“Verstand”) (whichsoever operates from
within a deterministic framework) and Reason
(“Vernunft”) (which operates on the grounds of freedom).
Examines the human capacity of judgment by analyzing aesthetic
experience, on one hand, and our ability to comprehend organic life,
on the other.

In his famous essay “What is Enlightenment?” Kant (1784)

offered a celebrated definition of What it was to be called
enlightened: to be enlightened was to ‘dare to know. Here, is
how Humankind will pose a self-incurred ability to question
existing tradition, prejudice, myth and Miracle. Thus,
enlightenment can be considered as an intellectual capacity
to understand Geography, polity and society around and
bring about new ideas to strengthen practical life.

Some critics have laid particular stress on the point that in

requiring impartial respect for all, Kantian ethics wholly
ignores the place of happiness, of the emotions, of personal
integrity and above all of personal relationships in the good
life (see Morality and emotions

Conclusion
In Kant’s view, the sole feature that gives an action moral
worth is not the outcome that is achieved by the action, but
the motive that is behind the action. And the only motive that
can endow an act with moral value, he argues, is one that
arises from universal principles discovered by reason.