Kant is a guy full of paradox.
His political philosophy - his outlook on law dos not agree with his moral philosophy.
To get your head around his giant architecture work of philosophy I suppose you need to significantly invest your time.
***
Main concepts that stands out (in my head without referring to my note..) are: Fundamental principle of morality - Categorical imperative (CI) = autonomous will of a rational being; Good will; Hypothetical impertatives (HI); Duties (Perfect and negative, imperfect and positive)Basic aim of moral philosophy is to "seek" out the 'foundational principle of a metaphysics of morals.' --> which is to say a priori-esque logic that is beyond empiricism - it cannot be analytical.
To say plainly, any action that is based on duty and no other reasons that driven those action (such as love) have moral worth.
Kant's moral philosophy
Good will is intrinsically good as with 4 other goods such as 1. gifts of nature, 2. fortune, 3. happiness/well-being, and 4. virtues prized by ancients. However, Good will is the only thing that is an unqualified good which can not be add/subtracted with anything including (positive/negative effect)
What is the relationship between duty and Good will?
Is it necessary that duty needs to be founded upon good will? It seems so, because duty as a rational being must be based on something intrinsically good.
And I think this is where categorical imperative and hypothetical imperative, sort of a ruler, --idea of moral law -- comes in.
But before then, let me add proposition of good will
1. Only actions done/motivated by/from duty possess moral worth/merit - as mentioned before
2. when action has moral worth, its mortal worth is contributed by the principle of volition/maxim in accord with which its action is done
3. duty is necessity of an action done out of respect for the moral laws
...so this actually defines duty pretty well:
Duty = action done for respect for the moral laws and nothing else = proposition of the good will which is the unqualified good
Going back...?
However stopping here briefly: What is metaphysics? I have scratched very basis that stood out for me the most. In order to talk about metaphysics you need to consider the Logic, physics and ethics.
And how is this related? in knowing differences between a priori (logic) and a posteri (physics and ethics)...from my note: morality is absolute --> need metaphysics to get to its nature (???)
From logic, which is a priori, we have metaphysicis. I have rather hard time wrapping my thoughts around this concept: Well... according to this website: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ I quote:
"A ‘metaphysics of morals’would be, more or less, an account of the nature and structure of moral reality — in effect, a categorization of duties and values. Such project would address such questions as, What is a duty? What kinds of duties are there? What is the good? What kinds of goods are there?" (scroll up)
....aaahh my head hurt
putting that aside still need to understand :
Structure of moral law --> Categorical imperative
wait, that's not all, there are in fact 2 imperatives!
1. Hypothetical imperatives: declares possible actions as practically necessary as means of attainment of something someone desires/wants
--> 2 kinds! 1. Problematic hypothetical imperative: possible desires involving Rule of skill
2. Assotoric hypothetical imperative: actual desires involving counsels of prudence
--> analytic: concept of the means is contained in the concept of willing an end
2. categorical imperatives: declares on action to be objectively necessary regardless of what one wnats/desires imperative of morality
-->synthetic: a priori
--> 4 duties derived from CI!
Negative/perfect: 1. Duty not to commit suicide out of self-love
2. Duty not to make false promise/lie
Positive/imperfect 3. Duty to perfect one's talents
4. Duty to assist others when they are in need
No comments:
Post a Comment