Kantianism
The categorical imperative
This term was coined by philosopher Immanuel Kant whereby he meant that we should treat people as an end and not as means to that end. This implies that people should be treated with autonomy. The categorical imperative by Kant is where deontological ethics is grounded. Deontological theories maintain that actions are not justified by their consequences. In other words, in deontology, the means explains the end and not the vice versa. The categorical imperative is unconditional and therefore still valid irrespective of the circumstances (Paton, 2011). By imperative, Kant meant a command. Categorical imperative differs from hypothetical imperative in that the former is conditional, unlike the latter which is unconditional.
Humanity as an end formulation
Philosopher Immanuel Kant maintained that rational human beings should be treated as an end in themselves and not as means. This is because humans have inherent value in themselves. According to Paton (2011), human worth does not depend on whether the person is enjoying their life or not or whether he/she is making other peoples lives better. This idea applies to us as well, we should not treat ourselves as means to our ends, but instead, we should respect our intrinsic value. This argument is used against suicide and euthanasia or any other act that damage ourselves
Universal Law formulation
In Kantian ethics, Universal Law formulation states that you are to “act only on that maxim or principle by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Kleingeld, 2018). This law says that it is morally wrong to act on maxims which lead to a contradiction when universalized.
Autonomy
Autonomy is an ethical principle which gives individuals the freedom to make decisions about themselves. Kant maintained that people should be treated with independence because they have self-worth. The principle of autonomy identifies the authority of law and bases the law on our esteem for the dignity of rational nature of human beings which makes every intelligent being an end in itself (Kleingeld, 2018). Kant states that autonomy as when humans make decisions which are not to satisfy a dispositional purpose.
Maxim
Maxim is the reason for acting in a particular manner. It is the rule or principle on which you operate. A maxim is part of an agent’s thought process for every rational action indicating the action, the type of activity, the conditions under which it is to be done and the purpose to be to be achieved by the work (Galvin, 2009). The categorical imperative provides a test on maxims for establishing whether the actions are right or wrong. An effort has moral worth if the maxim upon which it is acted conforms to a moral requirement.
Perfect duty
In Kantian ethics, a total commitment holds that there is a perfect duty, to tell the truth thus we must never lie. Kant held that perfect duties are more critical than imperfect duties. A perfect duty is one in which one must always do. In other words, we are obliged to do perfect duties.
Imperfect duty
An imperfect duty allows flexibility, for example, beneficence is an imperfect duty because we are not obliged to be entirely benevolent always. Instead one may choose the times or places in which we are (Wood, 2017). In other words, we are not obliged to help others. According to Kant, there are two imperfect duty: the duty to aid others and the duty of self-improvement.
Contradiction in conception test
This is one of the ways identified by Kant in which we could fail to be able to will our maxim (principle) to become universal (Galvin, 2009). In “contradiction in conception” happens if the situation in which everyone acted on that principle is somehow self-contradictory.
Contradiction in a willing test
This is the second way in which our maxim may fail. According to Kant, some proverbs are impossible to will as universal laws even though the result of their universalization is conceivable. The best example of this is the maxim never to help others in need.
Theory of Right Conduct
Obligatory: rights actions are either obligatory or optional. According to (Kleingeld, 2017), actions are those whose omission is optimal to blame.
Forbidden: acts of self-sacrifice performed for the sake of the good of others but which result in a greater balance of harm over good than alternative actions would produce are generally regarded as heroic but are forbidden as wrong by the utilitarian (Kleingeld, 2017).
Explain why Kantianism is a deontological theory
This is because deontological theories primarily focus on whether ethical decisions per se are right or wrong regardless of the outcomes or consequences of those actions. Kantianism is a deontological theory because it is non-consequentialist. It emphasizes action or decision rather than being concerned with the consequences or results of those decisions (Wood, 2017). The morality of an action is based on whether that action is right or wrong without minding its consequences. Kant developed categorical imperative on which deontological ethics is grounded. Kantianism maintains that actions are not justified by their results. In this case, the means justify the end rather than the end justifying the means as in utilitarianism. The Kantian theory is contrasted to consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism. According to deontological theory where Kantian ideas are grounded, the rightness or wrongness of an action depends solely on the consequences of those acts (Wood, 2017).
References
Galvin, R. F. (2009). Ethical formalism: The contradiction in conception test.
Kleingeld, P. (2017). Contradiction and Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Kant-Studien, 108(1), 89-115.
Kleingeld, P. (2018). The Principle of Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory: Its Rise and fall. Kant on Persons and Agency.
Paton, H. J. (2011). The categorical imperative: A study in Kant’s moral philosophy (Vol. 1023). University of Pennsylvania Press.
Wood, A. (2017). The final form of Kant’s practical philosophy. In Immanuel Kant (pp. 27-47).