Immanuel Kant, an 18th-century German philosopher, is famous for his logical and strict approach to ethics. He led a simple life: he never married, never traveled outside his hometown, and spent his days teaching, writing, walking, and drinking coffee. Although he was a Protestant, Kant kept philosophy and religion separate and built his ethical philosophy on reason.
Duty-Based Ethics vs. Consequence-Based Ethics
There are two main approaches in ethical philosophy: duty-based ethics (deontology) and consequence-based ethics (utilitarianism).
- Duty-Based Ethics (Kant’s view): An action is either right or wrong by itself, regardless of its results.
- Consequence-Based Ethics: The morality of an action depends on its outcomes or consequences.
Example: Lying and Vaccination
Take the case of Novak Djokovic, who lied about testing positive for COVID-19 to avoid taking the vaccine and participate in tournaments.
- Consequence-Based Ethics: If his lie didn’t harm anyone or change the outcome of the tournaments, his action might be considered acceptable.
- Duty-Based Ethics: Lying is inherently wrong, no matter the consequences.
For Kant, doing the right thing is a duty, regardless of the outcome.
Kant’s Two Main Rules for Morality
- Universalizability:
To determine if an action is moral, ask, “What if everyone did this?”
Example: A student cheats on a test and thinks it’s harmless. But if everyone cheated, grades and rewards would become meaningless, and society would lose trust in merit. Therefore, cheating is inherently wrong. - Pure Motives:
The reason behind an action must be purely to do the right thing. Any other motive makes the action immoral.
Example: Returning a lost wallet to avoid being caught on a security camera is not moral because the motive isn’t pure. True morality comes from doing the right thing simply because it is right.
Kant’s Strict Approach to Ethics
Kant’s ethical philosophy is very strict because it insists on pure motives:
- Doing good for a reward, like going to heaven, is not moral.
- Even loving God should not be the reason for doing good deeds.
- Good behavior must come from a sense of duty, not from personal beliefs like karma.
Respect for Human Dignity
Kant believed people must always be treated as ends, not as means to an end. This means every person has inherent value and should not be used as a tool for someone else’s benefit.
Example: If an architect builds your house, they are helping you achieve your goal. However, their goal (earning a fair payment) must also be respected. If you don’t pay them, you treat them as a tool and disrespect their dignity.
Criticism of Kant’s Ethics
While Kant’s philosophy is logical, it has limitations:
- Sometimes, consequences must be considered.
- Example: During World War II, if you were hiding a Jewish person and Nazi soldiers asked if they were in your home, telling the truth could lead to their death. In such cases, lying might save lives.
Kant believed people can usually distinguish between right and wrong, but sometimes the lines are blurry, and strict rules may not apply.
Conclusion
Kant’s duty-based ethics focus on doing the right thing for its own sake, not for rewards or results. Although this approach is strict and sometimes impractical, it highlights the importance of pure motives, treating others with respect, and evaluating actions based on universal principles. These ideas remain influential and relevant in today’s discussions about morality and ethics.