Kants Moral Principles Essay -- Kant Immanuel Philosophy Morals Essay

Kants Moral PrinciplesIn the knowledgeability of the Metaphysics of Morals, the author, Immanuel Kant, tries to solve a base by rejecting all ethical theories that be connected to consequences, and thus focusing on our ethical motivations and trans proceedings. Kant wants to derive profound characters out of contingently correctly actions. He believes that everything is contingent (everything can eat up mature or bad worth, depending on how it is used). So he is trying to dislodge the supreme principal of morality in all his crusadeing. Kant to a fault believes that an action is right or wrong based solely on the lawsuit by which it was performed. However, a Utilitarian, like arse Mill, would reject Kants reasoning of originating good characters out of actions alone, and instead argue that if an action has bad consequences, then the action was morally wrong.Kant believes that an action has moral worth only if it is do out of respect for our moral code. He names this mo ral action a duty. Kant also believes that in determining the moral worth of an action, we learn to look at the maxim by which it was performed. So, we need to look at ones reason for doing an action to determine if it is a duty. If the reason for performing the action is justified, then the action is a duty. However, Kant says there ar two different types of reasons for performing an action. Kant calls these reasons imperatives. The first reason for performing an action, the supposed(a) imperative, is based on consequences and on our personal preferences. They be also contingent, mean that they can be good or bad depending on how they argon used. People choose to perform a given action because of the mantic imperative. The guerilla reason for performing an action according to Kant is called the categorical imperative. These are not based on our preferences, begettert deal with consequences of an action, and are derived a priori. They are completely separate from hypothetic al imperatives. We all render knowledge of categorical imperatives before experiencing them first. They are kind of a second nature for us, which needs to be recognized according to Kant. These are the approximately important reason for performing an action. These imperatives also have the characteristics that Kant needs in order to make his point that all of our moral principals are categorical, have absolute authority, and are independent o... ...t hope to predict the outcome of both given situation. It is impossible there is no such thing as seeing the future. So by making a false call off to your friend, you have still done the morally wrong action, even though it will most likely save them some suffering. It did indeed engender a means their choices, so they cant act in a way they want to act (going to class). I happen to agree with Kants idea here. I think of that no matter what the consequences are, performing the right action is always the right thing to do. Overall I think that Kant has better arguments because they are directed at the individual, not at inn in whole. I also agree that the moral worth of actions is persistent by the motivating principal of the action, not by the consequences, like John Mill. So I am a deontologist, for the most part. However, I also agree with some of the things that Mill has to say. So is there a way that we can combine the ideas of Mill and Kant together in order to form a perfect society in which everybody is happy? I dont know the answer to this question, but we should all strive to do so, and we should start by respecting each others autonomy and treating others as ends.