KANT Kant was looking for some sort of objective basis for morality – a way of knowing our duty.

He came up with two kinds of imperatives or rules that we should follow: Hypothetical imperatives Categorical imperatives

THE HYPOTHETICAL IMPERATIVE Hypothetical imperatives are not moral commands, because they do not apply to everyone. You only need obey them if you want to achieve a certain ‘goal’ – a hypothetical imperative always starts with ‘if’.

For example: If I want to lose weight I ought to go on a diet and exercise more. A hypothetical imperative: depends on the results and aims at personal well-being.

THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE Categorical imperatives, on the other hand, are moral commands and do not begin with an if. They tell everyone what to do and do not depend on anything, especially desires or goals. They apply to everyone because they are based on an objective absolute law of reason.

HOW CAN WE TELL WHICH IMPERATIVE ARE CATEGORICAL? Kant suggested 3 basic tests: CAN IT REASONABLY BECOME A UNIVERSAL LAW? Kant calls this the Formula of the Law of Nature. I.e. before you act, ask yourself whether you would like everyone in the same situation to act in the same way. If not, then you are involved in a contradiction and what you are thinking of doing is wrong because it is against reason.

Kant uses promise-keeping as an example: Promise-breaking for my own interest cannot logically be a universal law. If everyone broke promises, then there would be no point in making promises – this is inconsistent and so cannot be a moral imperative. However Kant’s followers disagree about how to apply this universal law test.

Richard Hare suggests that you should: a. try to understand the consequences of following a moral principle on the people affected. b. try to imagine yourself in the place of these individuals. c. Ask yourself whether you want the principle to be followed regardless of where you imagine yourself in the situation.

2. NEVER TREAT PEOPLE AS A MEANS TO AN END. Kant calls this the Formula of End in Itself. He means that we should not exploit others. We should not consider ourselves superior or different to others. To be consistent we need to value everyone equally.

EXAMPLE: Imagine you propose a hydro-electric power scheme on the Turkish banks of the River Tigris. Lower down the river Turkish and Iraqi communities would suffer as a consequence of the reduction in the water supply. The benefits of the dam for some areas would be good, but by harming some people in order to achieve the general good you would be treating those people as a means to an end. Therefore the dam would be morally wrong.

Kant noted the illogical nature of projects that use people in pursuit of the general good. It is self-contradictory for you to act in a way that devalues the worth of the human being, whilst seeking to do something for the good of humankind.

Kant’s principle of humanity as an end also refers to the moral agent. It would be wrong for you to starve in order to give to the poor, since all people are of equal value. Shakespeare’s ‘Timon of Athens’ illustrates this: his generosity to others in good times leads to him becoming destitute himself. His kindness results in his own destruction. Kant would say this is morally wrong.

3. ACT AS IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE UNIVERSAL KINGDOM OF ENDS. Kant calls this the Formula of a Kingdom of Ends. He is describing a state of affairs in which all members of a society desire the same good; a society that the moral laws are designed to achieve. These goods are the common ends of humanity. Kant wants to achieve a state of affairs where conflict is removed and all people realise their common aims.

The intuitive idea behind this formulation is that our fundamental moral obligation is to act only on principles which could earn acceptance by a community of fully rational agents each of whom have an equal share in legislating these principles for their community.

How is this achieved? Consider: You meet with a group of people from your area because things are chaotic in your town or village. You need to sit down with them and draw up moral principles (maxims) that will establish a good, moral society. When you discuss your ideas with the other people in the room, you suddenly realise that they share your ideas. You meet them and, slowly but surely, you draw up laws for your society.

Kant believed that most humans are rational Kant believed that most humans are rational. They prefer the moral life to the immoral. Kant knew that it is not possible to realise this in life; but the process must be attempted. The universal kingdom of ends must be pursued.

QUESTIONS Kant suggests that where there is a clash of duties, we know what takes precedence by following the categorical imperative. Does this work? Discuss the following: It is your turn to make a presentation in class and you are running late. On the way you witness a car crash and are asked to wait to make a statement to the police. If only actual persons are ends in themselves, how would a Kantian approach a student who accidentally becomes pregnant and decides to have an abortion so as to continue her studies? “If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.” E.M.Forster. Do you agree?