Download Explain Kant`s understanding of Universal Maxims (33)

Explain Kant’s understanding of Universal Maxims (33)
A maxim is a rule by which to live, generally a moral one as opposed to a legal
law. Kant was a great believer in maxims, and he was a deontologist. Being a
deontologist, Kant had a great sense of duty – this was a fundamental part of
his philosophy.
For the morality parts of his philosophy, he sticks strongly to the idea of a
priori knowledge.
As well as this, Kant’s way of thinking is that before carrying out a given
action, one should consider whether or not that action should become a
universal law. That is to say, if you do something in a certain situation, should
that same thing be done by all people in the same situation?
This brings us on to the Categorical Imperative. Kant uses this to help us know
what actions are required and which are forbidden. They differ from
hypothetical imperatives in that categorical imperatives require no reasoning,
for instance “I ought to tell the truth”.
Categorical imperatives are conditional, for instance “If I want x, I must do y”.
“All imperatives command either hypothetically or categorically”
Kant, 1797
Kant’s idea of duty works by saying that you should always do your duty, and
this is what a given maxim should be – your duty. This creates moral goodness,
as everybody does their duty, which is morally correct and therefore can
become universal maxims.
The idea of not using something as a means to an ends, similar to hypothetical
imperatives, is an idea that Kant disagrees with. This is due to his
deontological ideas of duty, whereby you should do things purely because it is
your duty to do them, as opposed to it being because it is a means to an end.
Kant’s German upbringing can be seen here, as everybody’s duties are
essentially what the universal rules should be.
“Kant’s understanding of Universal Maxims cannot be defended.”
Discuss (17)
At first glance, it seems that Kant’s understanding of Universal Maxims can be
defended quite well, as much of it is indeed logical, and would make sense in
most situations.
Kant’s “universal law” is an example of a logical part of Kant’s theory, which
appears to make sense:
“Act only according to that maxim by which you can at
the same time will that it should become a universal law.”
Kant, 1785
This idea means that all situations are considered before they even occur, thus
ensuring that many possible risks or bad outcomes from the actions are
possibly removed prior to the event happening.
Kant’s theory is related to the motives of events or actions, unlike many
theories that only look at the consequences. Only looking at the consequences
can very often go the wrong way as good intention can easily lead to bad
outcomes, which do not necessarily need punishments because of them.
The theory does however have its downsides, which are somewhat good
arguments for universal maxims not being able to be defended.
In the case of lying, a universal rule saying that you cannot lie will very often
be a bad idea. For example, if a murderer was chasing an innocent victim, and
they asked you which direction the victim had run, the morally correct thing to
do would be to lie, however if a universal rule stated that you cannot lie, then
you will have to give away the victim’s life.
An absolute theory, such as universal maxims is usually not a good idea, as
nothing outside of one’s own mind is ever certain, and therefore a situation by
situation based set of moral ideas is the only way to do things.
In defence of the murderer example, and of Kant’s universal laws theory, the
morally incorrect thing of lying would not have been necessary if everybody
did the morally right thing – in this case that is not trying to murder in the first
place.
In conclusion, I think that Kant’s understanding of universal maxims cannot be
defended entirely, as absolute theories are not reliable enough for the real
world.
Sources:
Religious Studies, by Sarah K. Tyler and Gordon Reid
Ethical Studies, by Robert A Bowie
Ethics Discovering Right and Wrong, by Louis P. Pojman