Two Modes of Ethics

• Consequentialist --

• Deontological --

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

II. Immanuel Kant• Born in Konigsburg, Prussia (Germany)• April 22, 1724–February 12, 1804• Never traveled more than 100 miles away from his birthplace• Never married• Taught at the University of Konigsberg• First modern philosopher to be an academic philosopher• The primary area in which Kant wrote was ethical theory• Credited for the most comprehensive intellectual revolution since the

Enlightenment with the composition of A Critique of Pure Reason (1781). It is comparable to the works of Plato and Aristotle in importance. 2

“2” Federer, W. J. (2001). Great Quotations : A Collection of Passages, Phrases, and Quotations Influencing Early and Modern World History Referenced according to their Sources in Literature, Memoirs, Letters, Governmental Documents, Speeches, Charters, Court Decisions and Constitutions. St. Louis, MO: AmeriSearch. (Libronix Digital Library System [CD-ROM].

Significance of Kant

• Philosophy is now categorized into Pre-Kantian and Post-Kantian.

• Here’s the significance: Previous to Kant, philosophers asked questions related to the various kinds and applications of knowledge. Kant took a step back and asked the earth-shattering question =

Instead of asking about how to attain knowledge Kant asked, “IF knowledge is possible, what would there have to be in order to make it possible?

*This came to be known as the “Transcendental Method”

David Hume“If we take in our hand any volume of

divinity or school metaphysics, let us ask this question, “Does it contain any abstract reasoning about quantity or number?” No. “Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact or existence?” No. Commit it then to the flames for it can be nothing but sophistry and illusion.”

Importance of David Hume

Awoke Kant from his “…dogmatic slumbers.”

Kant’s Christianity

• Kant sought to rescue Christianity from the Enlightenment.

• Why did Kant believe that Christianity needed to be rescued?

• The Empiricists and Rationalists had done a number on Christian theism and Christian ethics. Thus, Kant REALLY tried to be Christian in his philosophy.

Immanuel Kant on Christianity

“The existence of the Bible, as a book for the people, is the greatest benefit which the human race has ever experienced. Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity.”651

651 Kant, Immanuel. Henry H. Halley, Halleys Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927, 1965), p. 19.

“In the life and the Divine doctrine of Christ which are recorded in the Gospel, example and precept conspire to

call men to the regular discharge of every moral duty for its own sake, and to the universal practice of pure virtue. “He can’t be wrong whose life is in the right.””

• “The Sermon on the Mount, in particular, comprises so pure a doctrine of religion, which Jesus obviously had the intention of introducing among the Jews, that we can not avoid considering it the Word of God.”

• “Beyond doubt, Christ is the Founder of the first true Church; that is, that Church which, purified from the folly of superstition and the meanness of fanaticism, exhibits the moral kingdom of God upon the earth as far as can be done for man.”652

– 652 Kant, Immanuel. An Inquiry into the Existence of God, Stephen Abbott Northrop, D.D., A Cloud of Witnesses (Portland, Oregon: American Heritage Ministries, 1987; Mantle Ministries, 228 Still Ridge, Bulverde, Texas), p. 263.

– Federer, W. J. (2001). Great Quotations : A Collection of Passages, Phrases, and Quotations Influencing Early and Modern World History Referenced according to their Sources in Literature, Memoirs, Letters, Governmental Documents, Speeches, Charters, Court Decisions and Constitutions. St. Louis, MO: AmeriSearch.

Kant’s Christianity: Summary

• Thus, it is clear to see Kant’s devotion to Christianity. However, in his quest to defend Christianity, Kant removed several of the key pillars of the Christian faith.

• For instance, Kant denied the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Kant’s Awakening

As mentioned previously, Kant tried to rescue “Science and reason” from the onslaught of the two primary schools of philosophy (Sproul).

This came when he was “Awakened from his dogmatic slumber” by the writings of the skeptic David Hume.

Kant’s Goal: Philosophical Reconciliation/Integration

Rationalism: Parmenides, Plato, Plotinus, Augustine, Descartes, Leibniz, etc.

Empiricism: Heraclites, Aristotle, Aquinas, Bacon, Locke,

*Kant tried to synthesize these two schools.

Rationalism: a priori “Before experience”

Empiricism: a posteriori “After/post experience”

Philosophies rooted in Kantian thought• Idealism• Marxism• Logical Positivism• Analytical Philosophy• Existentialism• Phenomenology• Pragmatism• Relativism• Pluralism= “All the movements of the 19th and 20th century trace their thoughts to SOME

aspect of Kant’s philosophy” – R.C. Sproul

Q# So what did Kant actually teach?

KANT & “The Categorical Imperative”

1. The Formula of Universal Law: Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become universal law.

KANT & “The Categorical Imperative”

1. The Formula of Universal Law

2. Every human being must be treated as an end as opposed to a means

3. You must act as if you are the moral authority of the universe

.A “maxim” is a general rule by which the agent

intends to act and which explains what he is doing at the time.

First, you decide what rule you would be following if you do that action (ex: If you are currently driving 10 miles an hour over the speed limit, then your maxim would be, ‘Whenever I am in this situation, I should drive 10 miles an hour over the speed limit.’);

Next, you ask yourself if you would be willing (or truly want) to have everyone else follow that same rule (which would make it a universal law);

And, lastly, if you could truly be willing for everyone to follow your little rule (maxim), then you are contemplating a permissible act (if not, the maxim and action must be rejected).

For Kant, moral rules have no exceptions (which is why they are “absolute”).

A paraphrase of the first formulation of the CI could be stated as a question: Would I really want it to be a law that everyone else in the world must do what I am doing right now?

If your answer is No, I would not it to be a law that everyone else in the world must drive 10 mph over the speed limit (or tell a little white lie to your best friend or fail to return a tool you borrowed from your neighbor or look out for your own interests only and so forth), then I should not be doing that thing either, because I have already reasoned out that such behavior would be morally wrong.

Criteria for Right Action1. A Good Will – it is without qualification. It is enough for

“proving” the existence of God. A good will is an end in itself.

2. Duty – moral obligation. Q# What obligates us? Hume = human nature. Kant disagrees. He claims it has to be Universal,

Unconditional, based on reason and not sentiment.*Kant does not at all take into account the outcome. If you have no inclination because of a sense of duty, your action has no moral worth.

The moral worth of an action resides in the motive of the action, not the result of the action.

*My respect for the moral law restrains my inclination.

CI – Plank # 2

2. Formula of the End in Itself: Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, never as a mere means but always at the same time as an end in itself.

PERSONS v. OBJECTS

Kingdom of EndsQ# What is an end in itself? = People (rational beings who

are both giving the moral law to themselves AND following it).

*We are this kingdom of ends, people who autonomously give themselves the moral law. In order to be a member of the kingdom of ends, you have to have inclinations that lead you away from the moral law.

Q# What are these “lower inclinations?”

If we were perfect…

If I was perfect, duty would be wholly unnecessary. Duty constrains the will against our fallen desires. With the absence of a “sin nature,” duty would have no moral worth because there would be no tension.

What separates us from animals?

“Morality is the only thing that for a rational being can be an end in itself.”

Ch. 36, p.235

Q# Is God ever subject to another’s will?

= No! God is the ruler of this kingdom of ends.

*The illustration of the Kingdom of Ends is a way of pointing out how we are not God.

Jack Bauer and Nina Myers situation

DUTY

It is your DUTY to do the Right Thing because it is the Right Thing – No

Exceptions!

Consequences do not matter!!!

Making you or someone else happy does not matter!!!

All that matters is that you chose to do the right thing!

*TOTAL OPPOSITE OF UTILITARIANISM

If you have done the right thing and something bad happens,it’s not your fault – because you did the right thing.

But if you did the wrong thing (such as lied) and something badhappens, it IS your fault that something bad happened, because YOU chose to do the wrong thing; your lie (orwhatever) was the cause of the bad thing happening.

Duties (Negative-Positive)

Because Perfect Duties can be performed only one way(i.e., Don’t do it!), Perfect Duties always win out if there is a conflict between duties (since you can always find another way to fulfill an imperfect Duty). Furthermore, there will never be a conflict between Perfect Duties.

• What makes Duty a moral good?• My lower inclinations?• No temptation to deviate from the

universal law of duty would mean that adherence to it cannot be classified as a “good.”

• Duty implies an imperfection of the human will

Q# Does God have a duty?

• Kant would adamantly say “NO!!!”

• Duty implies an imperfection in the will

• God has no imperfections

• Therefore, God does not have a Duty

Why refrain from vice?

The reason WHY we refrain from torturing prisoners of war, stealing, and indiscriminately smacking people in the face is because of their inherent worth as a person.

Who is Free?

To be free is to do be someone who does what is right.

*Freedom is a prerequisite to morality

If one is not free, one cannot be moral

Freedom

• Kant denies Bentham’s claim that “pain and pleasure are our masters.”

• Kant = Our reason sets us apart from creatures with mere physical appetites

*When we seek after pleasure and avoid pain, we are not free = we are slaves to our desires = acting according to natural necessity

Freedom

• Freedom is the opposite of Necessity• Sprite commercial “OBEY YOUR

THRIST!”*To act freely is to act autonomously…

to act according to a law I give myself. Not according to the laws of nature or the laws of cause & effect.”

What is Autonomy?

• Opposite of Heteronomy

• Heteronomy: To act according to desires I haven’t chosen for myself.

*Nature

*Giving wrong change - Motive?

*Not cheating on tests - Motive?

*Plagiarism - Motive?

Suicide

Review: Kant’s Three Contrasts

• Motives =

• Determination of will =

• Imperatives

Q# Why do we legislate moral laws?

= Because of the inherent worth of the human person

Human beings as moral beings have dignity. = A human being, as moral, is beyond the estimation of

worth. = We legislate moral laws out of respect for the human

person. *This respect emanates from the inherent worth of human

beings.

Q# What gives a person “worth?”= Kant - Because they were created in the image of God

Noumenal vs. Phenomenal

1. Phenomenal/world – The “world of sense.”

*I can only know how the chair appears to me, not what it really “is.”

*This is all that human knowledge is designed to process.

*The mind creates a framework of the world

*This is the totality of the world.

Noumenal vs. Phenomenal

2. Noumenal world – The world of “things in themselves.”

*This is where freedom of the will exists. In this world, my will is perfect. Why? The will is PERFECTLY free since there is no outside influence. There are no “desires,” only the reason of the will.

“Your mind makes it real” - Morpheus, The Matrix*Provides the foundation that allows the phenomenal world to

function*HERE IS A KEY OF THE IMPORTANCE OF NON-

MATTER!!!!!*This is the law of “Would.” This is what I “Would” do.*Kant is concerned about a “Circulatory of reasoning.” P.252

Kant on Reason• Reason must constrain the will and put shackles on it, tie it

up and force it in an action. • Reason constrains the will by objective principles. The

objective principles are themselves commandments. We have to formulate them and put them into language. The formulation of these commandments he calls “Imperatives.”

• *A Commandment represents an action as objectively necessary.

Kant on Reason

• If it is a hypothetical imperative, we don’t know what the end will be.

• Categorical imperative is the supreme principle of morality. You have to will that your maxim be the universal law.

• *It is different than utilitarianism b/c it doesn’t care about the result whereas utilitarianism is fueled by the end result.

Q# What is Freedom?

• Freedom – to have autonomy of the will vs. doing whatever one wants. It is a will subject to duty to the moral law.

• Q# What is duty? = The chains that constrain the will. = To be free is to do be someone who does what is right.

Q# How does Reason motivate?

= We do not know how. We simply know that it does

Kant: God’s Existence“Immanuel Kant, the eighteenth-century Enlightenment philosopher, did not trust pure reason to prove the existence of God, but he did trust the existence of moral law to prove God’s existence. According to Kant, the human desire to do what is righteous even in the face of death points to something beyond death. If we are willing to put aside self-preservation to do what is right, then a resurrection and a judgment holding us accountable and rewarding or punishing us for actions in this life is evident. Human virtue in the face of death points to a resurrection and judgment, which in turn indicates the existence of God.”

“The Fool Will Not Believe” by Dr. Malcolm B. Yarnell, III c2000, Kant, Critique of Practical Reason. Cf., Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d edn (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), pp. 183-84.

Review

Q# What constrains the will?

Q# What is it that helps us distinguish between right and wrong?

“In his creative synthesis, Kant became a philosophical agnostic about reality. He argued that the mind knows only after a construction is made and not before it. For him, only what appears (the phenomenal) to one is known, not that which really is (the noumenal). In addition, Kant asserted that whenever one attempts to apply the categories of the mind (such as unity or causality) to the noumenal (real) world, hopeless contradictions and antinomies arise.”

“One consequence of Kant’s revolt against reason is his fact/value dichotomy. For him, the “objective” world of fact is the phenomenal world of experience, while the “subjective” world of will cannot be known by pure reason. Instead, the subjective world is known by practical reason, or a morally postulated act of the will. For him, even though it is not possible to think that God exists, one must live as if God does exist. Thus, Kant philosophically questioned the objectivity and rationality of divine revelation. He placed religion in the realm of the postulated rather than the known. That gave rise to the moral imperative that lies behind Kant’s use of “moral reason” as the ground for determining what is essential to true religion. For Kant that reason demanded that he conclude that miracles do not occur.”28

– 2828. Immanuel Kant, Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone, translated with introduction by Theodore M. Greene and Hoyt H. Hudson, pp. 83-84.– Geisler, N. L., & Nix, W. E. (1996, c1986). A general introduction to the Bible (Rev. and expanded.) (141). Chicago: Moody Press.

Kingdom of Ends“In the kingdom of ends, people are treated as means

but never as ends. Since we all have imperfections,

we are all part of this kingdom of ends. Another

reason why we are a part is because we have a duty.

Duty itself implies that something has to be done.

Duty would not be difficult if there were no

temptations to neglect it. Our humanity is a proof of

our duty. Our duty is proof of our imperfection.

Since God has no imperfections, He cannot be said

to have a duty as does mankind. Instead, God is the

King or head of this kingdom of ends. Ultimately,

our duty is directed towards God.” Hodge, C. (1997). Systematic theology (3:258). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

There is individual liberty but without a moral set of presuppositions under-girding the thought process. If one appealed to the average Westerner based on whether they would have the whole world act based upon the premise or moral rules used by the individual, the response would undoubtedly be much different than in Kant’s day. It is likely that many would answer something like this:

I don’t care what the rest of the world does. I’ll lie, cheat and steal but just stay one step ahead of the crowd. I’ll be smart about it because I know how to do it and a man’s got to survive somehow.

Interestingly, the end product would be little different than that of postmodernism. When “Every man does that which is right in his own eyes,” society will inevitably break down. Thus, Kant’s appeal to a universal moral code could be and undoubtedly WAS effective in a modernist “Christianized” society. However, applied in the current postmodern culture pervading the West, the probable outcome would be frighteningly close to anarchy.

Kant would say…

Anarchical reasoning is a twisting of logic and a moral perversion…

*Postmodern rebuttal: Since there are no moral absolutes, there can be no moral perversion.

Results of Critique of Pure Reason

Kant does not think that we can conclusively know anything about:

1. God – 2. Freedom of the Will – 3. Immortality of the Soul –

He would answer “yes” to the existence of each of these subjects but would say that we have no way of knowing. “There has to be,” would be his answer.