Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
THE KANTIAN PROJECT
More contrasts with consequentialism...
What follows from the fact that human beings are agents? Which ways of treating human beings are appropriate or inappropriate in light of this fact?
Paternalism
FURTHER READING...
Reasons and Intentions Matter.
Another Test Case...
Test Case
"My feelings were not the result of any marked cruelty in the treatment I received; they sprung from the consideration of my being a slave at all. It was slavery—not its mere incidents—that I hated. I had been cheated. I saw through the attempt to keep me in ignorance; I saw that slaveholders would have gladly made me believe that they were merely acting under the authority of God, in making a slave of me, and in making slaves of others; and I treated them as robbers and deceivers. The feeding and clothing me well, could not atone for taking my liberty from me."
Person A refuses to help her friend, person B, who is in need, because A thinks B asks for assistance too often and A wants to teach B a lesson about self-reliance.
Claire is a recent college graduate mulling a decision between going to law school or pursuing a Ph.D in philosophy, and Peter is her anxious father who believes that she would be making a huge mistake if she were to forsake law for philosophy. Suppose Peter is motivated by a distrust in Claire's capacity to adequately recognize or weigh the reasons that apply to her and, as a result, tries to sabotage her efforts to apply to Ph.D programs for the sake of promoting her good. He does this without her knowing he's doing it, but suppose he has good reasons to think she would be better off doing law school.
FREDRICK DOUGLASS (1855)
Kyla Ebels-Duggan, "Kantian Ethics" in the Continuum Companion to Ethics
Christine Korsgaard, Creating the Kingdom of Ends
John Rawls, Lectures on Moral Philosophy
Onora O'Neill, "Kantian Responses to Some Famine Problems"
Immanuel Kant, Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals
Seanna Shiffrin (2000) on this case:
Paternalism vs. Respecting Agency
What's wrong with paternalism?
Things Kantians don't like...
"A fails to engage with B's rational, agential powers and, instead, subsitutes her judgement for B's about what B should aim for... this works around B's agency to get B to act as A believes would be better for B."
More test cases...
A treats B as a passive object of care, i.e. as a mere means to B's goal.
Agents vs. Objects/Tools
How do we relate to mere objects? How do we think of tools?
RESPECT
Learning Objectives...
We should not treat agents like this.
In spite of the fact that the consequences in #1 and #2 are identical, only #1 appears to contain an immoral action.
These all fail to respect the rational agency of persons.
Three Types of Motivation
1. Acting from immediate inclination.
2. Acting for the sake of other ends.
3. Acting from the motive of duty.
Acting rightly means acting from the motive of duty.
Kantians use examples such as this to motivate their view that intentions and motivations are intrinsically important for judging the morality of actions.
KANTIANS ON MORAL RIGHTNESS
Imagine two different scenarios that each result in the identical outcome: person A bumps into person B, who then falls on the ground.
Ways of treating persons that are too similar to the way we treat objects and tools...
Kantian Analysis of Racism and Sexism
Why do Kantians think reasons for action should play an essential role in morality?
Always respect the rational agency of persons (yourself included).
What about the basic premises of their theory force them to take reasons for action seriously when judging whether a person did right or wrong?
"The stereotypes that sustain sexism are similar in many ways to those that sustain racism. Like white women, black and brown persons of both sexes have been regarded as childlike, happiest when they are occupying their "place," more intuitive than rational, more spontaneous than deliberate, closer to nature, and less capable of substantial cultural accomplishment... they are thought to lack the capacities for rational control that distinguish people from animals."
Examples?
Or, put another way, never treat persons in a way that fails to respect their agency (i.e. never treat like mere objects or tools.)
In Scenario 1, person A intends to bump into person B because she takes pleasure in watching B fall over.
In Scenario 2, person A does not intend to bump into B and only accidentally causes B to fall.
Sandra Bartky, "On Psychological Oppression," (1979)
In both cases we find a profound failure to recognize and respect the agency of the oppressed.
The Kantian Perspective
Dr. Tyler Zimmer
ETHICS | NEIU
The Categorical Imperative
Kantians tell us to "respect agency."
What's the difference between treating a person as a...
What's the difference between me treating you as a means rather than a mere means?
But how can we know with precision whether we're respecting the agency of others?
means to an end.
mere means to an end?
(Morally permissible)
(Morally wrong)
Notice that this depends upon my reasons for treating you the way I'm treating you.
Use the categorical imperative.
TEST CASE #1
Immanuel Kant
on the categorical imperative.
Possible answer: so long as you don't coerce a person (physically force them) to do your bidding, then you are not treating them as mere means.
VERSION I: FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW.
VERSION II: FORMULA OF HUMANITY.
DO YOU TREAT ME AS MEANS OR AS MERE MEANS?
Is this answer convincing?
TEST CASE #2
But why do we need two tests?
Three Basic Questions in Moral Philosophy
DO YOU TREAT ME AS MEANS OR AS MERE MEANS?
REVIEW: UTILITARIANISM
Utilitarianism
TEST CASE #3
Rightness depends on goodness.
1. Pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically good (pain is the only intrinsically bad thing).
THE RIGHT vs. THE GOOD
Contemporary Kantian Theory*
Treating someone as a means to an end...
1. What is good?
2. What is right?
3. What is just?
You use someone to accomplish a goal you have, but you do so while also respecting them as rational agents.
2. The morally right action in any situation is whatever produces the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people.
EXPLOITATION
Treating someone as a mere means to an end...
Constructivists.
Realists.
Taking advantage of someone else's vulnerability in order to benefit oneself.
Emphasize the
Formula of Universal Law.
Emphasize the Formula of Humanity.
You treat someone as a means to an end and nothing but. You treat someone as a mere tool or object for your purposes.
3. A just society is one in which laws and institutions maximize goodness for the greatest number of people.
KANTIANS DENY THIS.
In this course, for the sake of simplicity, we'll focus more on the realist point of view and emphasize the formula of humanity.
TEST CASE #4
What is it to be vulnerable?
Review: how do utilitarians answer each?
But how do we know the difference in practice?
*note the difference between "Kant's ethics" and "Kantian ethics"
TEST CASE #5
Exploitation
FORMULA OF HUMANITY
"Always treat a human being (yourself included) as an end, never as a mere means."
p. 174, Shafer-Landau
Real-world interpersonal examples?
The Nuts and Bolts of Kantian Ethics
Kantians de-emphasize the importance of the question "what is good?" for morality.
PRACTICAL RATIONALITY
What does it mean to say that we're rational agents?
THE GROUND FLOOR OF KANTIAN ETHICS
We're free -- we're capable of making reasoned choices about what to do, what ends to adopt, etc.
Human beings are rational agents.
Kantians = the right is prior to and independent of the good.
Evidence of this?