Deontological Ethics

Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant
(1724-1804) a German philosopher
of the modern era, is known
primarily because of his Critique
of Practical Reason, which
becomes the foundation of his
moral philosophy.
Kant ‘s fundamental teaching states that
reason is the source of any moral or ethical
judgment. Reason and reason alone can
assist man in distinguishing good as moral
and evil as immoral. He categorically
rejects the role of feelings in our act of
discernment between good and evil.
Kantian Ethics states that man’s pursuit for
good is an act that has end in itself.
When we act freely, that means nobody
force us to perform an act that is against
our will. By virtue of this understanding,
Kant promotes that the only good will is
intrinsically good, and that this good is
freely chosen. Being free agent, man act
based on his sense of duty that he must do
good.
It is based on the concept of
human duty or human obligation
telling us that we ought to
perform what we must do whether
it is not our inclination, but in so
far as it is good that must be done
out of one’s duty or obligation.
Acting morally based on duty
must be understood whether
an act that is done “ from
the motive of duty” or an
act done “in accordance
with duty”.
Which is moral act?
Good Will
Good will is not just the source of intrinsic
good, it is actually intrinsically good. As such,
all concepts of good as well as the concept of
happiness must be related to good will.
Affirming this is denying other ethicists point
of view that happiness is the summum bonum
or the highest good, nor happiness is the
possession of material things, nor happiness is
based on the practical uses of an object, etc.
Kant, happiness is meaningless if
not combined with good will.
Here enters good will, as such, the
goodness or evilness of this ability
is determined based on the ends
or motives of the person.
Categorical Imperative
To understand Kant’s categorical imperative, it is good to
look into its different from hypothetical imperative.
(Manebog et al.) write about hypothetical and
categorical imperative as, “if you want to attain a certain
end, act in such-and-such a way”, “No matter what end
you desire to attain, act in such-and-such a way”. The
difference between these two is obvious. Hypothetical is
introduced by “ifs” and “qualifications”, while
categorical has no exceptions, no “ifs”, and no
qualifications.
Categorical imperative is achieved on its
own merits. Kantian Ethics emphasizes the
existence of rules which determined man’s
moral status, thus, a person who follows
these ordained rules are considered moral.
In this sense categorical imperative serves
as a moral compass that guides moral and
immoral acts.
“Universalizability”
is a famous formulation of Kant’s categorical
imperative. It means that a person is ought
always to behave as if his course of conduct
were to become a universal code of behavior
or considered as a universal law.
It states that when we act, we have to
consider our own person and that of others as
an end not as means
To be Continue…..
Thank you for Listening