Kantian Deontology - Part One

Kantian Deontology - Part OneImmanuel Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals

Nathan Kellen

University of Connecticut

February 19th, 2015

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Table of Contents

Course Recap and Plan

The Good Will

ImperativesHypothetical ImperativesCategorical Imperatives

The Categorical ImperativeThe Universal Law Formulation

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:

I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositions

I Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or persons

I Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianism

I Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Recap

To recap what we’ve done so far in this course:

1. We discussed metaethics, and assumed three theses:I There are true moral propositionsI Morality does not vary with cultures or personsI Morality does not depend on god(s)

2. We talked about one type of moral theory, utilitarianism, whichcame in two forms:

I Act utilitarianismI Rule utilitarianism

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Deontology

Now we’re on to talking about a new type of moral theory - deontology.

Deontologists are moral theorists who believe that morality is based induties (δεoν; duty).

Importantly, deontology is a different type of moral theory altogetherfrom utilitarianism.

Utilitarians typically rely on a notion of good consequences; deontologiststypically rely on rules, independently of their consequences.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Deontology

Now we’re on to talking about a new type of moral theory - deontology.

Deontologists are moral theorists who believe that morality is based induties (δεoν; duty).

Importantly, deontology is a different type of moral theory altogetherfrom utilitarianism.

Utilitarians typically rely on a notion of good consequences; deontologiststypically rely on rules, independently of their consequences.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Deontology

Now we’re on to talking about a new type of moral theory - deontology.

Deontologists are moral theorists who believe that morality is based induties (δεoν; duty).

Importantly, deontology is a different type of moral theory altogetherfrom utilitarianism.

Utilitarians typically rely on a notion of good consequences; deontologiststypically rely on rules, independently of their consequences.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Deontology

Now we’re on to talking about a new type of moral theory - deontology.

Deontologists are moral theorists who believe that morality is based induties (δεoν; duty).

Importantly, deontology is a different type of moral theory altogetherfrom utilitarianism.

Utilitarians typically rely on a notion of good consequences; deontologiststypically rely on rules, independently of their consequences.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Kantian Deontology

Immanuel Kant is the most well known deontologist. Kant was a 18thcentury German philosopher and Enlightenment thinker.

Kant’s ethical theory, call it Kantian deontology, derives moral rules (orcommands/imperatives), and then argues that they must be upheld.

So Kant derives some rules for his theory, and then says that what weought to do, what are duties are, come from those rules.

As we’ll see, Kantian deontology is much different than utilitariantheories.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Kantian Deontology

Immanuel Kant is the most well known deontologist. Kant was a 18thcentury German philosopher and Enlightenment thinker.

Kant’s ethical theory, call it Kantian deontology, derives moral rules (orcommands/imperatives), and then argues that they must be upheld.

So Kant derives some rules for his theory, and then says that what weought to do, what are duties are, come from those rules.

As we’ll see, Kantian deontology is much different than utilitariantheories.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Kantian Deontology

Immanuel Kant is the most well known deontologist. Kant was a 18thcentury German philosopher and Enlightenment thinker.

Kant’s ethical theory, call it Kantian deontology, derives moral rules (orcommands/imperatives), and then argues that they must be upheld.

So Kant derives some rules for his theory, and then says that what weought to do, what are duties are, come from those rules.

As we’ll see, Kantian deontology is much different than utilitariantheories.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Course Recap and Plan

Kantian Deontology

Immanuel Kant is the most well known deontologist. Kant was a 18thcentury German philosopher and Enlightenment thinker.

Kant’s ethical theory, call it Kantian deontology, derives moral rules (orcommands/imperatives), and then argues that they must be upheld.

So Kant derives some rules for his theory, and then says that what weought to do, what are duties are, come from those rules.

As we’ll see, Kantian deontology is much different than utilitariantheories.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will?

Kant begins with a discussion of his concept of the Good Will, whichwill likely strike most as confusing.

The overall lesson of this section to takeaway is twofold:

First, Kant believes that there is only one thing which is morally good inthe ultimate sense.

Second, Kant’s views on the Good Will stress the importance ofintentions for his theory.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will?

Kant begins with a discussion of his concept of the Good Will, whichwill likely strike most as confusing.

The overall lesson of this section to takeaway is twofold:

First, Kant believes that there is only one thing which is morally good inthe ultimate sense.

Second, Kant’s views on the Good Will stress the importance ofintentions for his theory.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will?

Kant begins with a discussion of his concept of the Good Will, whichwill likely strike most as confusing.

The overall lesson of this section to takeaway is twofold:

First, Kant believes that there is only one thing which is morally good inthe ultimate sense.

Second, Kant’s views on the Good Will stress the importance ofintentions for his theory.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will?

Kant begins with a discussion of his concept of the Good Will, whichwill likely strike most as confusing.

The overall lesson of this section to takeaway is twofold:

First, Kant believes that there is only one thing which is morally good inthe ultimate sense.

Second, Kant’s views on the Good Will stress the importance ofintentions for his theory.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will

Shafer-Landau defines the Good Will as the “steady commitment to doour duty for its own sake”.

That is, a Good Will is our will (our mental selves, of a sort) when we dothe right thing, for the right reason.

In claiming that the Good Will is the only thing “good withoutlimitation”, he is claiming that everything else is not purely good; it canbe corrupted.

For example, Kant thinks that the virtues (courage, patience, etc.) andeven utility is not purely good.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will

Shafer-Landau defines the Good Will as the “steady commitment to doour duty for its own sake”.

That is, a Good Will is our will (our mental selves, of a sort) when we dothe right thing, for the right reason.

In claiming that the Good Will is the only thing “good withoutlimitation”, he is claiming that everything else is not purely good; it canbe corrupted.

For example, Kant thinks that the virtues (courage, patience, etc.) andeven utility is not purely good.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will

Shafer-Landau defines the Good Will as the “steady commitment to doour duty for its own sake”.

That is, a Good Will is our will (our mental selves, of a sort) when we dothe right thing, for the right reason.

In claiming that the Good Will is the only thing “good withoutlimitation”, he is claiming that everything else is not purely good; it canbe corrupted.

For example, Kant thinks that the virtues (courage, patience, etc.) andeven utility is not purely good.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good Will

Shafer-Landau defines the Good Will as the “steady commitment to doour duty for its own sake”.

That is, a Good Will is our will (our mental selves, of a sort) when we dothe right thing, for the right reason.

In claiming that the Good Will is the only thing “good withoutlimitation”, he is claiming that everything else is not purely good; it canbe corrupted.

For example, Kant thinks that the virtues (courage, patience, etc.) andeven utility is not purely good.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Good Without Limitation

Kant claims that the Good Will is the only thing good without limitationbecause it is the only thing which, by definition, can do no wrong.

Think about what people do to gain pleasure, power, wealth or utility(for themselves or all).

Kant claims that all these things, when used incorrectly, can be used inevil ways.

The Good Will on the other hand, because it’s by definition the part ofus which does the morally right thing, cannot be morally wrong.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Good Without Limitation

Kant claims that the Good Will is the only thing good without limitationbecause it is the only thing which, by definition, can do no wrong.

Think about what people do to gain pleasure, power, wealth or utility(for themselves or all).

Kant claims that all these things, when used incorrectly, can be used inevil ways.

The Good Will on the other hand, because it’s by definition the part ofus which does the morally right thing, cannot be morally wrong.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Good Without Limitation

Kant claims that the Good Will is the only thing good without limitationbecause it is the only thing which, by definition, can do no wrong.

Think about what people do to gain pleasure, power, wealth or utility(for themselves or all).

Kant claims that all these things, when used incorrectly, can be used inevil ways.

The Good Will on the other hand, because it’s by definition the part ofus which does the morally right thing, cannot be morally wrong.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Good Without Limitation

Kant claims that the Good Will is the only thing good without limitationbecause it is the only thing which, by definition, can do no wrong.

Think about what people do to gain pleasure, power, wealth or utility(for themselves or all).

Kant claims that all these things, when used incorrectly, can be used inevil ways.

The Good Will on the other hand, because it’s by definition the part ofus which does the morally right thing, cannot be morally wrong.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Kant vs Utilitarianism

The difference between utilitarianism and Kantian deontology should beclear now.

What is it?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Kant vs Utilitarianism

The difference between utilitarianism and Kantian deontology should beclear now.

What is it?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Doing the Right Thing

Kant’s claims about the Good Will rest on an assumption (albeit aplausible one).

His claim that the Good Will is the only thing which is good requires thatdoing the morally right thing is good.

This might seem commonsensical. Kant certainly thinks it is, but it’sworth noting.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Doing the Right Thing

Kant’s claims about the Good Will rest on an assumption (albeit aplausible one).

His claim that the Good Will is the only thing which is good requires thatdoing the morally right thing is good.

This might seem commonsensical. Kant certainly thinks it is, but it’sworth noting.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Doing the Right Thing

Kant’s claims about the Good Will rest on an assumption (albeit aplausible one).

His claim that the Good Will is the only thing which is good requires thatdoing the morally right thing is good.

This might seem commonsensical. Kant certainly thinks it is, but it’sworth noting.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Doing the Right Thing

Kant’s claims about the Good Will rest on an assumption (albeit aplausible one).

His claim that the Good Will is the only thing which is good requires thatdoing the morally right thing is good.

This might seem commonsensical. Kant certainly thinks it is, but it’sworth noting.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good vs The Right

By looking at it this way, we see another way which utilitarianism andKant differ.

Kant defines what is good (The Good) in terms of what is morally right(The Right). He thinks what is morally right is prior to any notion ofwhat is good, or valuable.

Utilitarians go the complete other way. They start with an idea of what’sgood, or valuable, utility (The Good) and define what is right to do (TheRight) in terms of that. So they think The Good is prior to The Right.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good vs The Right

By looking at it this way, we see another way which utilitarianism andKant differ.

Kant defines what is good (The Good) in terms of what is morally right(The Right). He thinks what is morally right is prior to any notion ofwhat is good, or valuable.

Utilitarians go the complete other way. They start with an idea of what’sgood, or valuable, utility (The Good) and define what is right to do (TheRight) in terms of that. So they think The Good is prior to The Right.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good vs The Right

By looking at it this way, we see another way which utilitarianism andKant differ.

Kant defines what is good (The Good) in terms of what is morally right(The Right). He thinks what is morally right is prior to any notion ofwhat is good, or valuable.

Utilitarians go the complete other way. They start with an idea of what’sgood, or valuable, utility (The Good) and define what is right to do (TheRight) in terms of that. So they think The Good is prior to The Right.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Intentions

The second main lesson to take away from the discussion of the GoodWill is that Kant believes that intentions for action (why we dosomething) as very morally important.

According to Kant, for some action to be morally good it must be donefrom duty, rather than merely in accordance with duty.

Something is done in accordance with duty if you’re doing the right thing.

Something is done from duty if you’ve done the right thing, and done itfor the right reason.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Intentions

The second main lesson to take away from the discussion of the GoodWill is that Kant believes that intentions for action (why we dosomething) as very morally important.

According to Kant, for some action to be morally good it must be donefrom duty, rather than merely in accordance with duty.

Something is done in accordance with duty if you’re doing the right thing.

Something is done from duty if you’ve done the right thing, and done itfor the right reason.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Intentions

The second main lesson to take away from the discussion of the GoodWill is that Kant believes that intentions for action (why we dosomething) as very morally important.

According to Kant, for some action to be morally good it must be donefrom duty, rather than merely in accordance with duty.

Something is done in accordance with duty if you’re doing the right thing.

Something is done from duty if you’ve done the right thing, and done itfor the right reason.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

Intentions

The second main lesson to take away from the discussion of the GoodWill is that Kant believes that intentions for action (why we dosomething) as very morally important.

According to Kant, for some action to be morally good it must be donefrom duty, rather than merely in accordance with duty.

Something is done in accordance with duty if you’re doing the right thing.

Something is done from duty if you’ve done the right thing, and done itfor the right reason.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Right Reasons

According to Kant, the right reasons for doing something is because it’sthe right thing to do.

So for Kant, you can do the right thing without it being morally goodthat you’ve done it.

Think about someone who saves a drowning child because they want tobecome famous. What would Kant say?

What would the utilitarian say?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Right Reasons

According to Kant, the right reasons for doing something is because it’sthe right thing to do.

So for Kant, you can do the right thing without it being morally goodthat you’ve done it.

Think about someone who saves a drowning child because they want tobecome famous. What would Kant say?

What would the utilitarian say?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Right Reasons

According to Kant, the right reasons for doing something is because it’sthe right thing to do.

So for Kant, you can do the right thing without it being morally goodthat you’ve done it.

Think about someone who saves a drowning child because they want tobecome famous. What would Kant say?

What would the utilitarian say?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Right Reasons

According to Kant, the right reasons for doing something is because it’sthe right thing to do.

So for Kant, you can do the right thing without it being morally goodthat you’ve done it.

Think about someone who saves a drowning child because they want tobecome famous. What would Kant say?

What would the utilitarian say?

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good, the Bad and the Neutral

Because of this, we see that Kant opens up three possibilities for anaction to fall under.

An action, if done from duty, is good.

An action, if done contrary to duty (i.e. you had a duty to do it, anddidn’t), is bad.

An action, if neither done from duty nor contrary to duty, is neutral.

On Kant’s view, most day-to-day actions are neutral. You probably don’thave a duty to tie your shoes, and don’t have a duty to not tie them. Soit’s value is just neutral.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good, the Bad and the Neutral

Because of this, we see that Kant opens up three possibilities for anaction to fall under.

An action, if done from duty, is good.

An action, if done contrary to duty (i.e. you had a duty to do it, anddidn’t), is bad.

An action, if neither done from duty nor contrary to duty, is neutral.

On Kant’s view, most day-to-day actions are neutral. You probably don’thave a duty to tie your shoes, and don’t have a duty to not tie them. Soit’s value is just neutral.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good, the Bad and the Neutral

Because of this, we see that Kant opens up three possibilities for anaction to fall under.

An action, if done from duty, is good.

An action, if done contrary to duty (i.e. you had a duty to do it, anddidn’t), is bad.

An action, if neither done from duty nor contrary to duty, is neutral.

On Kant’s view, most day-to-day actions are neutral. You probably don’thave a duty to tie your shoes, and don’t have a duty to not tie them. Soit’s value is just neutral.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good, the Bad and the Neutral

Because of this, we see that Kant opens up three possibilities for anaction to fall under.

An action, if done from duty, is good.

An action, if done contrary to duty (i.e. you had a duty to do it, anddidn’t), is bad.

An action, if neither done from duty nor contrary to duty, is neutral.

On Kant’s view, most day-to-day actions are neutral. You probably don’thave a duty to tie your shoes, and don’t have a duty to not tie them. Soit’s value is just neutral.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Good Will

The Good, the Bad and the Neutral

Because of this, we see that Kant opens up three possibilities for anaction to fall under.

An action, if done from duty, is good.

An action, if done contrary to duty (i.e. you had a duty to do it, anddidn’t), is bad.

An action, if neither done from duty nor contrary to duty, is neutral.

On Kant’s view, most day-to-day actions are neutral. You probably don’thave a duty to tie your shoes, and don’t have a duty to not tie them. Soit’s value is just neutral.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

With those notes out of the way, we can discuss the meat of this chapter.

Kant’s system revolves around what he calls The Categorical Imperative.But what is an imperative?

An imperative is a statement in the imperative mood, e.g. requests,commands, prohibitions and permissions.

Kant’s imperatives are expressed by must statements. They tell us thatwe must do something, and thus are inherently normative.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

With those notes out of the way, we can discuss the meat of this chapter.

Kant’s system revolves around what he calls The Categorical Imperative.But what is an imperative?

An imperative is a statement in the imperative mood, e.g. requests,commands, prohibitions and permissions.

Kant’s imperatives are expressed by must statements. They tell us thatwe must do something, and thus are inherently normative.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

With those notes out of the way, we can discuss the meat of this chapter.

Kant’s system revolves around what he calls The Categorical Imperative.But what is an imperative?

An imperative is a statement in the imperative mood, e.g. requests,commands, prohibitions and permissions.

Kant’s imperatives are expressed by must statements. They tell us thatwe must do something, and thus are inherently normative.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

With those notes out of the way, we can discuss the meat of this chapter.

Kant’s system revolves around what he calls The Categorical Imperative.But what is an imperative?

An imperative is a statement in the imperative mood, e.g. requests,commands, prohibitions and permissions.

Kant’s imperatives are expressed by must statements. They tell us thatwe must do something, and thus are inherently normative.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

Imperatives for Kant are valid for all rational beings, not just humans.

Some imperatives are relatively important, while others are not. But allhold objectively, in the sense that they are derived from reason andabsolutely certain.

Imperatives do not however, force action. An imperfect will can ignoreimperatives as a matter of physical possibility.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

Imperatives for Kant are valid for all rational beings, not just humans.

Some imperatives are relatively important, while others are not. But allhold objectively, in the sense that they are derived from reason andabsolutely certain.

Imperatives do not however, force action. An imperfect will can ignoreimperatives as a matter of physical possibility.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Imperatives

Imperatives for Kant are valid for all rational beings, not just humans.

Some imperatives are relatively important, while others are not. But allhold objectively, in the sense that they are derived from reason andabsolutely certain.

Imperatives do not however, force action. An imperfect will can ignoreimperatives as a matter of physical possibility.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Kant’s imperatives come in two forms, the first of which he callshypothetical imperatives.

Hypothetical imperatives tell you what you must do in order toaccomplish something.

Think of this as means-ends reasoning. You have some ends, i.e. goalsyou want to accomplish. You must choose some means, some way to getthere.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Kant’s imperatives come in two forms, the first of which he callshypothetical imperatives.

Hypothetical imperatives tell you what you must do in order toaccomplish something.

Think of this as means-ends reasoning. You have some ends, i.e. goalsyou want to accomplish. You must choose some means, some way to getthere.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Kant’s imperatives come in two forms, the first of which he callshypothetical imperatives.

Hypothetical imperatives tell you what you must do in order toaccomplish something.

Think of this as means-ends reasoning. You have some ends, i.e. goalsyou want to accomplish. You must choose some means, some way to getthere.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hyopthetical Imperatives

Hypothetical imperatives tell you that some action is good for somepurpose or another.

Hypothetical actions don’t tell us what’s good full stop - it’s always goodrelative to some purpose.

These ends can be morally good or bad - they’re just whatever you wantto accomplish.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hyopthetical Imperatives

Hypothetical imperatives tell you that some action is good for somepurpose or another.

Hypothetical actions don’t tell us what’s good full stop - it’s always goodrelative to some purpose.

These ends can be morally good or bad - they’re just whatever you wantto accomplish.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Hyopthetical Imperatives

Hypothetical imperatives tell you that some action is good for somepurpose or another.

Hypothetical actions don’t tell us what’s good full stop - it’s always goodrelative to some purpose.

These ends can be morally good or bad - they’re just whatever you wantto accomplish.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Two Kinds of Hypothetical Imperatives

There are two kinds of hypothetical imperatives. The first are rules ofskill, which tell you what you must do for some specific end that youhave in mind that might vary across persons.

In opposition to this you have hypothetical imperatives which arecounsels of prudence, because they’re about perfect happiness, whicheveryone shares as an end.

Perfect happiness isn’t just momentary happiness - it’s something moregeneral. Sometimes we call it something like “well-being” nowadays.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Two Kinds of Hypothetical Imperatives

There are two kinds of hypothetical imperatives. The first are rules ofskill, which tell you what you must do for some specific end that youhave in mind that might vary across persons.

In opposition to this you have hypothetical imperatives which arecounsels of prudence, because they’re about perfect happiness, whicheveryone shares as an end.

Perfect happiness isn’t just momentary happiness - it’s something moregeneral. Sometimes we call it something like “well-being” nowadays.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

Two Kinds of Hypothetical Imperatives

There are two kinds of hypothetical imperatives. The first are rules ofskill, which tell you what you must do for some specific end that youhave in mind that might vary across persons.

In opposition to this you have hypothetical imperatives which arecounsels of prudence, because they’re about perfect happiness, whicheveryone shares as an end.

Perfect happiness isn’t just momentary happiness - it’s something moregeneral. Sometimes we call it something like “well-being” nowadays.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Hypothetical Imperatives

So a hypothetical imperative tells you to do something in order toaccomplish some end you have. But how do we fulfil these?

The first and most obvious way is to actually do what the imperativesays, e.g. practice piano in order to be a good pianist.

Alternatively one can give up on the end, which eliminates your need todo the means.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Hypothetical Imperatives

So a hypothetical imperative tells you to do something in order toaccomplish some end you have. But how do we fulfil these?

The first and most obvious way is to actually do what the imperativesays, e.g. practice piano in order to be a good pianist.

Alternatively one can give up on the end, which eliminates your need todo the means.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Hypothetical Imperatives

So a hypothetical imperative tells you to do something in order toaccomplish some end you have. But how do we fulfil these?

The first and most obvious way is to actually do what the imperativesays, e.g. practice piano in order to be a good pianist.

Alternatively one can give up on the end, which eliminates your need todo the means.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical imperatives stand in contrast to hypothetical imperatives.They tell us what we must do, full stop.

That is, categorical imperatives don’t tell us what we should in order tobe happy, or to be moral, etc. They are pure commands of reason, e.g.“Do not murder!”.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical imperatives stand in contrast to hypothetical imperatives.They tell us what we must do, full stop.

That is, categorical imperatives don’t tell us what we should in order tobe happy, or to be moral, etc. They are pure commands of reason, e.g.“Do not murder!”.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Categorical imperatives stand in contrast to hypothetical imperatives.They tell us what we must do, full stop.

That is, categorical imperatives don’t tell us what we should in order tobe happy, or to be moral, etc. They are pure commands of reason, e.g.“Do not murder!”.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Instrumental Goodness and Intrinsic Goodness

Hypothetical imperatives describe what is good as a means to somethingelse. Call this instrumental good.

Categorical imperatives on the other hand tell us what actions are goodin and of themselves. Call this intrinsic goodness.

The intuitive idea is that intrinsic goodness takes precedence overinstrumental goodness.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Instrumental Goodness and Intrinsic Goodness

Hypothetical imperatives describe what is good as a means to somethingelse. Call this instrumental good.

Categorical imperatives on the other hand tell us what actions are goodin and of themselves. Call this intrinsic goodness.

The intuitive idea is that intrinsic goodness takes precedence overinstrumental goodness.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

Instrumental Goodness and Intrinsic Goodness

Hypothetical imperatives describe what is good as a means to somethingelse. Call this instrumental good.

Categorical imperatives on the other hand tell us what actions are goodin and of themselves. Call this intrinsic goodness.

The intuitive idea is that intrinsic goodness takes precedence overinstrumental goodness.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Categorical Imperatives

Unlike hypothetical imperatives, there is only one way to fulfil categoricalimperatives, namely by actually fulfilling them.

Because there is no end in categorical imperatives there is no end to giveup on and avoid action.

Put simply, categorical imperatives tell us what we must do as a purematter of reason, not relative to some purpose.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Categorical Imperatives

Unlike hypothetical imperatives, there is only one way to fulfil categoricalimperatives, namely by actually fulfilling them.

Because there is no end in categorical imperatives there is no end to giveup on and avoid action.

Put simply, categorical imperatives tell us what we must do as a purematter of reason, not relative to some purpose.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

Imperatives

Categorical Imperatives

How to Fulfil Categorical Imperatives

Unlike hypothetical imperatives, there is only one way to fulfil categoricalimperatives, namely by actually fulfilling them.

Because there is no end in categorical imperatives there is no end to giveup on and avoid action.

Put simply, categorical imperatives tell us what we must do as a purematter of reason, not relative to some purpose.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

The Categorical Imperative

So on to the Categorical Imperative! Or at least part of it. Recall that ithas two parts we’re concerned with (two formulations).

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

The Categorical Imperative

So on to the Categorical Imperative! Or at least part of it. Recall that ithas two parts we’re concerned with (two formulations).

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

The Universal Law Formulation

The first formulation of the CI is called the Universal Law Formulation(ULF). Our translation today states:

I should never act except in such a way that I can also will thatmy maxim should become a universal law.

As this is complicated, we will spend the rest of the day discussing it.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

The Universal Law Formulation

The first formulation of the CI is called the Universal Law Formulation(ULF). Our translation today states:

I should never act except in such a way that I can also will thatmy maxim should become a universal law.

As this is complicated, we will spend the rest of the day discussing it.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

The Universal Law Formulation

The first formulation of the CI is called the Universal Law Formulation(ULF). Our translation today states:

I should never act except in such a way that I can also will thatmy maxim should become a universal law.

As this is complicated, we will spend the rest of the day discussing it.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Maxims

The first important bit is what Kant calls maxims.

A maxim is a principle of action. Specifically, it is a principle of the form:

I will do ϕ in circumstances C in order to bring about ψ.

Where ϕ is some action, C is a description of some circumstances, and ψis some consequences or state of affairs.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Maxims

The first important bit is what Kant calls maxims.

A maxim is a principle of action. Specifically, it is a principle of the form:

I will do ϕ in circumstances C in order to bring about ψ.

Where ϕ is some action, C is a description of some circumstances, and ψis some consequences or state of affairs.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Maxims

The first important bit is what Kant calls maxims.

A maxim is a principle of action. Specifically, it is a principle of the form:

I will do ϕ in circumstances C in order to bring about ψ.

Where ϕ is some action, C is a description of some circumstances, and ψis some consequences or state of affairs.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Maxims

The first important bit is what Kant calls maxims.

A maxim is a principle of action. Specifically, it is a principle of the form:

I will do ϕ in circumstances C in order to bring about ψ.

Where ϕ is some action, C is a description of some circumstances, and ψis some consequences or state of affairs.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Willing Maxims

To figure out whether an action is morally permissible, that is, whetherwe can do it, we need to run it through the ULF.

The first part of doing that is to formulate the maxim.

Then we must imagine, or will, what would happen if everyone adoptedthat maxim.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Willing Maxims

To figure out whether an action is morally permissible, that is, whetherwe can do it, we need to run it through the ULF.

The first part of doing that is to formulate the maxim.

Then we must imagine, or will, what would happen if everyone adoptedthat maxim.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Willing Maxims

To figure out whether an action is morally permissible, that is, whetherwe can do it, we need to run it through the ULF.

The first part of doing that is to formulate the maxim.

Then we must imagine, or will, what would happen if everyone adoptedthat maxim.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Inconceivable Universal Maxims

The idea is that some maxims will produce inconceivable results whenuniversalised.

That is, if we were to imagine a world in which everyone follows thatmaxim, it would be contradictory.

If this is the case, then the action under consideration is immoral, andyou have a duty not to do it.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Inconceivable Universal Maxims

The idea is that some maxims will produce inconceivable results whenuniversalised.

That is, if we were to imagine a world in which everyone follows thatmaxim, it would be contradictory.

If this is the case, then the action under consideration is immoral, andyou have a duty not to do it.

Kantian Deontology - Part One

The Categorical Imperative

The Universal Law Formulation

Inconceivable Universal Maxims

The idea is that some maxims will produce inconceivable results whenuniversalised.

That is, if we were to imagine a world in which everyone follows thatmaxim, it would be contradictory.

If this is the case, then the action under consideration is immoral, andyou have a duty not to do it.