figure in the intellectual movement called the Enlightenment. “Enlightenment is the leaving behind of one’s self- caused immaturity, getting over the inability to use one’s intelligence without another’s guidance.”
figure in the intellectual movement called the Enlightenment. ! For him the role of philosophy was to critically reflect on the nature of reasoning and its limits. “Enlightenment is the leaving behind of one’s self- caused immaturity, getting over the inability to use one’s intelligence without another’s guidance.”
figure in the intellectual movement called the Enlightenment. ! For him the role of philosophy was to critically reflect on the nature of reasoning and its limits. ! Kant’s ethics emphasizes our rights and duties which follow from reason alone. “Enlightenment is the leaving behind of one’s self- caused immaturity, getting over the inability to use one’s intelligence without another’s guidance.”
not do something whether you like it or not. ! Duties entail rights: If you have duties to me, I have rights you must respect. ! Do we have real duties and rights?
not do something whether you like it or not. ! Duties entail rights: If you have duties to me, I have rights you must respect. ! Do we have real duties and rights? ! On what basis?
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests.
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests. Our sense of what is good for us individually or collectively pulls us towards doing what is right.
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests. Our sense of what is good for us individually or collectively pulls us towards doing what is right. But is what is good always what is right?
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests. Our sense of what is good for us individually or collectively pulls us towards doing what is right. But is what is good always what is right? 3. Duties are based on reason.
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests. Our sense of what is good for us individually or collectively pulls us towards doing what is right. But is what is good always what is right? 3. Duties are based on reason. If we are rational and self-governing we push and pull ourselves to do what is right.
God, the police, our parents push us to do what is right. But is something right because they say so, or do they say so because it is right? 2. Duties are based on desires and interests. Our sense of what is good for us individually or collectively pulls us towards doing what is right. But is what is good always what is right? 3. Duties are based on reason. If we are rational and self-governing we push and pull ourselves to do what is right. This is Kant’s claim, but how does this work?
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory?
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory? ! Practical Reason
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory? ! Practical Reason Tells us what we should do.
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory? ! Practical Reason Tells us what we should do. Does our plan of action realize our goals?
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory? ! Practical Reason Tells us what we should do. Does our plan of action realize our goals? Are our goals consistent with each other?
should believe. Does the evidence support our claims? Are our claims consistent with other things we take to be true? Are our claims self-contradictory? ! Practical Reason Tells us what we should do. Does our plan of action realize our goals? Are our goals consistent with each other? Are our goals contradictory in themselves – can they count as universal principles?
is asking whether it is generally acceptable. ! Immoral action is irrational because it is self-contradictory. ! It is based on goals and principles that cannot be taken as universally valid.
is asking whether it is generally acceptable. ! Immoral action is irrational because it is self-contradictory. ! It is based on goals and principles that cannot be taken as universally valid. ! This is expressed in a general rule for morality, the “Categorical Imperative:”
is asking whether it is generally acceptable. ! Immoral action is irrational because it is self-contradictory. ! It is based on goals and principles that cannot be taken as universally valid. ! This is expressed in a general rule for morality, the “Categorical Imperative:” “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.”
like it might be, if lying gets me what I want and you believe my lies. But is it rational to lie in general? When I lie, I expect that others will believe me because they value telling the truth and assume it as the norm.
like it might be, if lying gets me what I want and you believe my lies. But is it rational to lie in general? When I lie, I expect that others will believe me because they value telling the truth and assume it as the norm. But my lie undermines this norm.
like it might be, if lying gets me what I want and you believe my lies. But is it rational to lie in general? When I lie, I expect that others will believe me because they value telling the truth and assume it as the norm. But my lie undermines this norm. So lying cannot be a “universal law” – if everyone lied, nobody would believe anybody so my lie would be pointless.
like it might be, if lying gets me what I want and you believe my lies. But is it rational to lie in general? When I lie, I expect that others will believe me because they value telling the truth and assume it as the norm. But my lie undermines this norm. So lying cannot be a “universal law” – if everyone lied, nobody would believe anybody so my lie would be pointless. Lying is wrong because it contains a contradiction and cannot be “universalized.”
like it might be, if stealing gets me what I want and I get to keep your stuff. But is it rational to steal in general? When I steal, I expect that others will respect my ownership of what I have stolen because they value and assume respect of property rights.
like it might be, if stealing gets me what I want and I get to keep your stuff. But is it rational to steal in general? When I steal, I expect that others will respect my ownership of what I have stolen because they value and assume respect of property rights. But my stealing undermines this norm.
like it might be, if stealing gets me what I want and I get to keep your stuff. But is it rational to steal in general? When I steal, I expect that others will respect my ownership of what I have stolen because they value and assume respect of property rights. But my stealing undermines this norm. So stealing cannot be a “universal law” since if everyone stole, there would be no property rights and my stealing would be pointless.
like it might be, if stealing gets me what I want and I get to keep your stuff. But is it rational to steal in general? When I steal, I expect that others will respect my ownership of what I have stolen because they value and assume respect of property rights. But my stealing undermines this norm. So stealing cannot be a “universal law” since if everyone stole, there would be no property rights and my stealing would be pointless. Stealing is wrong because it contains a contradiction and cannot be “universalized.”
else? It seems like it might be, if murder gets me what I want and I get to enjoy my life with you in the way. But is it rational to murder in general?
else? It seems like it might be, if murder gets me what I want and I get to enjoy my life with you in the way. But is it rational to murder in general? When I murder, I expect that others will let me live in peace me because they value other’s lives.
else? It seems like it might be, if murder gets me what I want and I get to enjoy my life with you in the way. But is it rational to murder in general? When I murder, I expect that others will let me live in peace me because they value other’s lives. But my act of murder undermines this norm.
else? It seems like it might be, if murder gets me what I want and I get to enjoy my life with you in the way. But is it rational to murder in general? When I murder, I expect that others will let me live in peace me because they value other’s lives. But my act of murder undermines this norm. So murder cannot be a “universal law” since if everyone murdered, all of our lives would be insecure and my act of murder would be pointless.
else? It seems like it might be, if murder gets me what I want and I get to enjoy my life with you in the way. But is it rational to murder in general? When I murder, I expect that others will let me live in peace me because they value other’s lives. But my act of murder undermines this norm. So murder cannot be a “universal law” since if everyone murdered, all of our lives would be insecure and my act of murder would be pointless. Murder is wrong because it contains a contradiction and cannot be “universalized.”
of what they do, but because of what they are – incoherent and inconsistent with themselves. ! Our duty not to do wrong is based only on our capacity to understand this.
of what they do, but because of what they are – incoherent and inconsistent with themselves. ! Our duty not to do wrong is based only on our capacity to understand this. ! Moral and legal responsibility require only the capacity to tell right from wrong in this way.
of what they do, but because of what they are – incoherent and inconsistent with themselves. ! Our duty not to do wrong is based only on our capacity to understand this. ! Moral and legal responsibility require only the capacity to tell right from wrong in this way. ! A perfect moral world would be one of mutual and universal respect among rational agents.
of what they do, but because of what they are – incoherent and inconsistent with themselves. ! Our duty not to do wrong is based only on our capacity to understand this. ! Moral and legal responsibility require only the capacity to tell right from wrong in this way. ! A perfect moral world would be one of mutual and universal respect among rational agents. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”
between: things: they are expendable, can be owned, are objects used as a means to an end and which have a price. persons: we are uniquely valuable, cannot be owned, are ends in ourselves and have an inherent dignity.
between: things: they are expendable, can be owned, are objects used as a means to an end and which have a price. persons: we are uniquely valuable, cannot be owned, are ends in ourselves and have an inherent dignity. ! Utilitarianism fails as a moral theory because it fails to make this distinction and treats us all as means to the end of greater happiness.
between: things: they are expendable, can be owned, are objects used as a means to an end and which have a price. persons: we are uniquely valuable, cannot be owned, are ends in ourselves and have an inherent dignity. ! Utilitarianism fails as a moral theory because it fails to make this distinction and treats us all as means to the end of greater happiness. ! The idea of basic human legal and moral rights depends on this distinction as well.
high for human morality by asking us to be purely rational and treat each other with unconditional respect? ! What happens when duties conflict – is it ever acceptable to lie to protect someone?
high for human morality by asking us to be purely rational and treat each other with unconditional respect? ! What happens when duties conflict – is it ever acceptable to lie to protect someone? ! Don’t consequences matter at all?
guide our actions. It tells us what we should do, not what we actually do. ! Sometimes we seem to have no choice but to do wrong in order to do what is right, but we must take full responsibility for failing to fulfill all of our duties and not make excuses.
guide our actions. It tells us what we should do, not what we actually do. ! Sometimes we seem to have no choice but to do wrong in order to do what is right, but we must take full responsibility for failing to fulfill all of our duties and not make excuses. ! Moral thinking just isn’t about consequences, it is about our relations to each other as free and equal moral agents.
on reason alone. arguments O Immoral actions are based on self-contradictory principles and so are unjustified. consequences " Morality would be objective, rational and unbiased. " Distinction between persons (respect) and things (use value). " The concept of rights can be defended.
on reason alone. arguments O Immoral actions are based on self-contradictory principles and so are unjustified. consequences " Morality would be objective, rational and unbiased. " Distinction between persons (respect) and things (use value). " The concept of rights can be defended. evaluation Good arguments. Is Kantian ethics too demanding?
geoslack
mineo_matsuya
terahide
ktanishima
koic
ohmori_yusuke
copilot
kfujita
bernhardsvt
cbtlibrary
mchowning
herumi
27th
stephaniewalter
lara
rocio
pauljervisheath
tanoku
gr2m
lauravandoore
matthewcrist
akosma
jakevdp
garrettdimon
aki_iinuma
