Kant's Moral Philosophy Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Kants Moral Philosophy - Term Paper ExampleArgument or arrest Kants Deontology posits that the best way to act virtuously to act from duty with the consideration of the highest satisfactory, that is, a good with extinct condition which is intrinsically good by itself (Kant, 1780). He formulated his deontological ethics in a matt commanding of doing good for the sake of good disirrespective of its consequence (Kant, 1785). Explication of argument To effectively argue that Kantian Deontology is the correct moral theory, it would be necessary to explain the formulation that executes Kants deontology which is categorical assertive. According to Kant, imperatives accuse what they meant which are command such as wake up early. Often they are vatic imperative because they only serve a specific objective or purpose such as wake up early so you will not be later for work. This imperative or command becomes categorical when it is applied universally and that the actions and decisions o f individuals are to be judged solely by their motivations and that the consequences do not matter virtuously (as in the case of hypothetical imperative) neither the intended consequences nor the actual consequences matter morally only the principle or rule we follow if we do the action matters morally. In simpler terms, this meant doing what is good regardless of consequence and that by doing is an end by itself. Thus, actions themselves become an end and this action should be a sharp result in the exercise of freewill Consistent to this, Kants categorical imperative states that every someone has the duty to use and exercise his goodness/humanity as a means to an end. The application of Kants categorical imperative is best illustrated in slave ownership. A slave owner may asseverate his right to own a property which in this case is a slave. While ownership by itself is not immoral, slave ownership becomes unethical or immoral according to Kants categorical imperative because it d eprives a person of his free rational action and that persons can never be a stainless means to an end (Johnson, 2012). One distinct characteristic of Kants categorical imperative is that it is universal and unbending that it applies to everyone without exception. For Kant, neither good nor bad lot affects in assessing the moral act of a person. His idea of state of grace did not become good because it serves an end or objective but because it intends to do good regardless of the consequence. Objection The best objection to Kants deontological ethics as formulated by categorical imperative is Thomas Nagels argument about moral luck. Unlike Kant, Thomas Nagel makes an exception through his assumption of moral luck that there are a broad range of externalities that affects moral judgment. Moral luck occurs when an agent can be correctly treated as an object of moral judgment disdain the fact that a significant aspect of what she is assessed for depends on factors beyond her work (Nelkin, 2013). It meant that we should only be assessed morally only to the extent that the factors attendant to the circumstances of our actions that we can control as stated in his control principle. This argument also hold sway because it consider the realities and externalities of which an action must be carried out and therefore, an act is best judged by considering its environment.