Immanuel Kant and the

Rights Theory
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
 LEARNING OBJECTIVES
At the end of this Module, you should be able to:

1.Discuss and describe what Kant’s Theory (Deontology) is all

about.
2.Explain and demonstrate the different formulation of
Categorical Imperative
3.Clarify what Rights Theory is all about
4.Differentiate between a legal from a moral right
5.Analyze and apply Rights Theory in your daily life
 KANTIAN ETHICS
IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804)
BORN APRIL 22, 1724 IN KÖNIGSBERG,
NEAR THE SOUTHEASTERN SHORE OF THE
BALTIC SEA.
TODAY KÖNIGSBERG HAS BEEN RENAMED
KALININGRAD AND IS PART OF RUSSIA .
WORKS
- AUTONOMY OF THE WILL AND
DEONTOLOGICAL THEORY
- MORAL DUTY AND CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
 Introduction
Kant categorically rejects that ethical judgments are based on
feelings/emotions.
For him, human feelings and emotions even serve as
obstructions/impediments/hindrance to our discernment of right or
wrong.
His ethical theory bases moral judgments on pure reason
alone/Absolute Rationalism.
Reason, for him, “is what deems an action ethical or otherwise”.
 1. Good Will
Kant believes that one of the functions and capacities of our reason is
to produce a Will which is Good not as a means to some further end,
but good in itself. (Intrinsic Value)
Good will is:
◦The highest good(from Highest Intelligence/Reason) Abstraction
◦The highest condition of all goods within the will (Supreme Being)
Kant disagrees with happiness as the summum bonum.
Happiness for Kant can be corrupting and may be
worthless or even positively evil WHEN NOT combined
with Good Will.
 Who is a person with “good will”

A person with goodwill (or a good person) is person who acts

from a sense of duty even in the face of difficulty.
A moral act must be:
◦An act of a free agent
◦An act done NOT from inclination / disposition (from
pure reason alone)
◦An act done from sense of duty
 Inclination vs. Duty

Inclination refers to the feeling/emotions that pushes us to

select a particular option or make a particular decision.

Duty (or Obligation) is that which we OUGHT to do despite

our inclination to do otherwise.
 Duty (deon)
Acts done “from the motive” of duty
Acts done “in accordance” with duty
Examples of acts done in accordance with duty:
◦Respect and obey one’s parents
◦Paying one’s debt for justice’s sake
◦Displaying honesty for at all times
◦Helping others because it is the duty of one’s state
◦Taking care of children-siblings because you are given the task to do
 Duty (deon)

Acting morally entails acting “from the motive” of duty regardless of

consequences that doing so or not doing so will bring.

***It is only when we recognize that we ought to do an act because it

is our duty, understand the nature of this duty, and act upon it =
means to perform an authentic moral act.
 Maxim/Rules/Regulations/Principles
Can a person know what his duty is in a given situation?

Is there a test to find out what one’s duty is in a particular set of

circumstances?

*** as rational beings, it is our duty to act on principle or maxim and

not simply on impulse.
 Categorical Imperative
What is a maxim?
- it is a general rule or principle which serves as a guide to action.
- examples:
Be honest always.
Respect one’s rights and privacy
Always obey rules and regulations in all places
Display Nationalism/Patriotism/Volunteerism in one’s life
 Categorical Imperative
Kant’s Two (2) Classes of Maxims:
◦ HYPOTHETICAL maxim (imperative)
◦ CATEGORICAL maxim (imperative)

◦ Hypothetical imperatives – are being true only under some conditions,

and therefore not universally valid.
- contingent (conditional) and derivative
- example: If you wish to pass the exam, then study hard.
 Categorical Imperative
Categorical imperatives – command a person to act in particular ways
regardless of what goals one looks for or what the end may be. (Non-
conditional)
◦Categorical = EXCEPTIONLESS
(binding on all persons, in all circumstances/events,
at all times, in all places)
= UNIVERSALIZABILITY
“Act only on that maxim through which you
can at the same time will that it should
become a universal law”
 Categorical Imperative
◦UNIVERSALIZABILITY = “how would this action appear if it were to
become a universal rule?”

◦Categorical = END IN ITSELF

“Act as to use humanity, both in your own person
and in the person of every other, always at the
same time as an end, never simply as means.”
 Moral Standards for Kant
1. Human being must act as if the principles of his actions are
UNIVERSAL in nature.
2. The individual must always treat other individuals as an END
ITSELF.

***Can I rationally will everyone to act as I propose to act?

***Does my action respect the goals of human beings rather
than merely using them for my own purposes?
 Moral Standards for Kant
4 Formulations of Categorical Imperative:
1. Universalizability means that a moral act is unconditional in nature
– any act must be morally justifiable in all places at all times,
universality means that when put in the same situation, any
individual would act in the same manner.
2. The idea that the human being is an End in Itself (Humanity)
emanates from the fact that each person has dignity and that each
human person is inviolable.
3. Autonomy “The idea of the will of every rational being as a will
that legislates universal law.”- laws are of our own making.
Autonomy - our status as independent/free moral agents is the
source of our dignity and worth- we are “moral beings above all.”
4. Kingdom of Ends “Act in accordance with the maxims of a member
giving universal laws for a merely possible kingdom of ends.”
Our moral obligation is to act only on principles which could earn the
acceptance of a community of fully rational agents each of whom has
an equal share in legislating principles for the community.
Rights Theory
PART 2
 Principle of Rights Theory
The notion that in order for a society to be efficacious,
“government must approach the making and enforcement of laws
with the right intentions in respect to the end goals of the society
that it governs.”
“Members of the society agree to give up some freedoms for the
protection enjoyed by organized society, but governments cannot
invade upon the rights that citizens have been promised.
 Principle of Rights Theory
When applied to war, rights theory states that in order for a
war to be deemed morally justifiable, the intention of entering
into war ought to be right in relation to human rights.
◦ For Kant, the reasoning of our actions together with the outcome
are equally significant.
◦ If the intent is evil, then the outcome, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, is evil
as well.
 Rights Based Ethics
There are some rights, positive and negative, that all humans
have based only on the fact that they are human.
These rights are NATURAL and CONVENTIONAL.
Natural – rights that are moral
Conventional – rights that are created by humans and reflect
society’s values.
 Rights Based Ethics System (examples)
Right to Life
Right to Liberty
Right to pursue happiness
Right to jury trial
Right to a lawyer
Right to practice a religious choice
…others please see them on page 119-120 0f Ethics Book
 Legal vs. Moral Rights
Legal Rights – all the rights found within existing legal codes.
◦ These enjoy the recognition and protection of the law.
◦ Questions can be resolved by referring to the legal instrument or
piece of legislation.
◦ Limited validity set by jurisdiction by the body which passed its
legislation.
 Legal vs. Moral Rights
Moral Rights – exist prior to and independently from their legal
counterparts.
◦ The existence and validity of a moral right is not dependent on
jurists and legislators.
◦ Cannot be reduced to and exclusively identified to legal rights.
◦ Universal even though it is not recognized legally by all places.
 Next Meeting
Quiz
Coverage:
◦Moral Courage
◦Basic Theories and Frameworks in Ethics
◦Virtue Ethics
◦Kantian Ethics and Rights Theory