Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 259 views

    Lesson III - Kant and Right Theory

    Uploaded by

    Pauline Moral
    This document discusses Kantian ethics and rights theory. It begins by explaining Kant's view that moral judgements should be based on reason alone, not feelings. It describes the concepts of good will and the categorical imperative in Kantian ethics. It then analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Kant's approach. The document also discusses rights theory, explaining that for Kant rights must be justified based on intentions regarding human rights. Finally, it distinguishes between legal rights defined by law and moral rights that exist independently.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lesson III - Kant and Right Theory

    Uploaded by

    Pauline Moral
    259 views25 pages
    This document discusses Kantian ethics and rights theory. It begins by explaining Kant's view that moral judgements should be based on reason alone, not feelings. It describes the concepts of good will and the categorical imperative in Kantian ethics. It then analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Kant's approach. The document also discusses rights theory, explaining that for Kant rights must be justified based on intentions regarding human rights. Finally, it distinguishes between legal rights defined by law and moral rights that exist independently.

    Original Description:

    jgjh

    Original Title

    Lesson III_ Kant and Right Theory.pptx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses Kantian ethics and rights theory. It begins by explaining Kant's view that moral judgements should be based on reason alone, not feelings. It describes the concepts of good will and the categorical imperative in Kantian ethics. It then analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Kant's approach. The document also discusses rights theory, explaining that for Kant rights must be justified based on intentions regarding human rights. Finally, it distinguishes between legal rights defined by law and moral rights that exist independently.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    259 views25 pages

    Lesson III - Kant and Right Theory

    Uploaded by

    Pauline Moral
    This document discusses Kantian ethics and rights theory. It begins by explaining Kant's view that moral judgements should be based on reason alone, not feelings. It describes the concepts of good will and the categorical imperative in Kantian ethics. It then analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Kant's approach. The document also discusses rights theory, explaining that for Kant rights must be justified based on intentions regarding human rights. Finally, it distinguishes between legal rights defined by law and moral rights that exist independently.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 25

    Lesson III: Kant

    and Right Theory


    Samaniego, Rhea Mae
    Mendoza, Joana Rose
    Tuscano, Rizza
    Sub-Topics

    1. Kantian Ethics
    1.1 Good will
    1.2 Categorical Imperative
    2. An analysis of Kantian Ethics
    3. Rights Theory
    4. Legal vs. Moral Rights
    1. Kantian Ethics
    Immanuel Kant
    (1724-1804)

    A German thinker
    regarded by many as
    the most significant
    philosopher in the
    modern era.
    KANTIAN ETHICS

    Kant categorically rejects For, him, FEELINGS even serve as


    that ethical judgements are obstructions to our discernment
    based on feelings. of right and wrong
    KANTIAN ETHICAL THEORY

    Ethical theory instead bases


    moral judgements on REASON
    alone.

    REASON , for Kant, is what deems


    an action ethical or not.
    1.1 GOOD WILL

    Kant believes that when we wish to determine the moral


    status of an action, we consult reason.

    An act either accords with reason or it does not. If it accords


    with reason, we must do it, if not, we must avoid it.

    Kant believes that one of the functions and capacities of


    our reason is to produce a will which is good not as a
    means to some further end, but good in itself
    GOOD WILL

    It is the highest good/ virtue.

    Kant does not agree with many ethicists that HAPPINESS is


    the summum bonum or the biggest good.

    HAPPINESS
    For him, it can be corrupting and may be worthless or even
    positively evil when not combined with a good will.
    In the same way, intellectual eminence, talents, character,
    self control, and fortune cannot be intrinsically good for
    they can be used to bad ends.

    “ Who is a good person or a person of good will?”


    It is the person who acts from a sense of duty.

    Kant thinks that acting from a sense of duty means


    exhibiting good will even in the face of difficulty.
    It must be an act done not from inclination but from a
    sense of duty dictated by reason.

    Inclination
    refers to the feelings that pushes to select a particular
    option or make a particular decision.

    Sense of duty
    Is that which we ought to do despite our inclination to do
    otherwise.
    Normally, people performs the acts which please them or
    which they desire to do.

    For Kant, these actions determined by desires , appetites


    and the like have no moral worth.

    We act morally only when we restrain our feelings and


    inclination and do that which we are obliged to do
    Acting morally entails acting from the motive of duty
    regardless of the consequences that doing so or not doing
    so will bring

    Morality is essentially connected with duties and


    obligations.
    1.2 Categorical Imperative

    It is the supreme principle of morality.

    Morality means acting in accordance with the categorical


    imperative otherwise, it is non-moral or immoral
    What is Categorical Imperative?

    Command

    2 Types of Imperative

    1. Hypothetical Imperative - Conditional command

    2. Categorical Imperative - Absolute command


    2. An analysis of Kantian Ethics

    Many who have read and understood Kant's ethical


    system find it sensible and plausible. In fact, when we try
    to prove that one's particular action is unethical and ask
    him, "What if everybody behaved as you do?", we are
    actually advocating Kant's 'universalizability' formulation
    of the categorical imperative.
    ● Kant's view is a rule-bound moral philosophy that puts a
    premium on rules rather than on humans.
    ● Kant favors motive and consequences as having
    moral worth.
    ● Kant's theory differs from that of Aristotle in that a
    moral act involves being contrary to someone's
    feelings, natural inclinations, and wishes.
    Key Concepts of Kantian Ethics:

    ● Categorical Imperative: The central principle of Kantian


    ethics is the categorical imperative, which requires
    individuals to act according to moral rules that could
    be universally applied without contradiction.

    ● Good Will: Kant argues that the moral worth of an


    action depends on the motive behind it.

    ● Moral Duties: Kant proposes that individuals have


    certain moral duties that are binding in all
    circumstances.
    Strengths of Kantian Ethics:

    ● Universalizability: it emphasis on the categorical imperative


    and the idea of treating others as ends in themselves allows
    for moral principles to be applied universally.

    ● Emphasis on Rationality: Kantian ethics prioritizes rationality


    and reason as the basis for moral judgment.

    ● Respect for Autonomy: Kantian ethics values individual


    autonomy and emphasizes the importance of respecting the
    rational capacity and dignity of every person.
    Weaknesses of Kantian Ethics:

    ● Lack of Flexibility: Critics argue that Kantian ethics can be inflexible


    in its approach, as it relies on strict adherence to moral rules
    without considering particular circumstances or context.

    ● Overemphasis on Intentions: Kantian ethics places significant


    importance on the motive or intention behind an action, rather than
    considering the consequences.

    ● Lack of Guidance in Moral Dilemmas: Kantian ethics may struggle


    to provide clear guidance in situations where moral duties conflict
    or when faced with moral dilemmas.
    3. Rights Theory
    In law, Immanuel Kant proposed the principle of rights. He saw a
    distinctive correlation, yet difference, between the intent of the
    law and the enforcement of law.

    Kant's principle of rights theory states that government must have


    the right intentions to make and enforce laws, and that war
    should be morally justifiable if the intention is right in relation to
    human rights.
    Rights Based Ethics is a broad moral theory in which
    Kant's principle of rights theory is included.

    The concept of rights based ethics is that "there are some rights,
    both positive and negative, that all humans have based only on the
    fact that they are human. These rights can be natural or
    conventional.
    Examples of Rights Based Ethics System include the following
    a. The right to life
    b. The right to liberty
    c. The right to pursue happiness
    d. The right to a jury trial.
    e. The right to a lawyer
    f. The right to freely practice a religion of choice
    g. The right to express ideas or opinions with freedom as an individual
    h. The right of individuals or organizations to express opinions or share
    information freely in written medium
    i. The right to come together and meet in order to achieve goals
    j. The right to be informed of what law has been broken if arrested
    k. The right to call witnesses to speak on one's behalf if accused of a crime
    1. The right of a person to be treated with respect and dignity even after beign
    found guilty of a crime
    m. The right to freely live and travel within the country
    n. The right to work
    o. The right to marry
    P. The right to bear children
    9. The right to free education
    r. The right to join any peaceful parties or groups of choice
    s. The right to be free from slavery
    t. The right to not be tortured
    u. The right to be treated as equal to others
    v. The right to be considered to be innocent until proven
    guilty
    w. The right to personal privacy.
    x. The right to own property
    4. Legal vs. Moral Rights

    LEGAL RIGHTS

    ● are the rights that are 'on the books

    ● Embody the conventional positive law


    ● Denote all the rights found within existing
    legal codes. As such, they enjoy the
    recognition and protection of the law.
    MORAL RIGHTS
    ● refer to what ought to be
    ● represent the natural law
    ● Are rights that "exist prior to and
    independently from their legal counterparts.
    The existence and validity of a moral right is
    not deemed to be dependent upon the actions
    of jurists and legislators"

    You might also like