Although Kant’s moral theory makes many great points about equity and equality. the negatives of the theory outweigh the positives. Kant’s moral theory would ne’er be able to work in today’s society. His theory is based entirely on ever carry throughing your moral responsibility. Which would be impossible since one time person told a prevarication or showed emotion everything would fall apart. Due to the fact that everyone wouldn’t trust anyone any longer which wouldn’t terminal up good. Deontology is defined as the theory of responsibility.
Kant’s moral theory can be categorized as a deontological theory. due to his belief that you have a moral responsibility to carry through ( Kant 114 ) . Kant believes that all people have intrinsic or built-in value. Which in simple footings mean that we as human existences are held to a higher criterion ; to cognize what is right and incorrect ( Kant 114 ) . Kant provinces that there are merely two rules for an action to be morally right. First. you must hold done the action out of the motive of good will. Kant defines good will as “To act out of responsibility. out of a concern and regard for the moral law” ( Kant 114 ) . Good will plays a really of import function on measuring the moral worth of an action.
Kant explains that you can’t merely have good will for an action but besides you must make the right thing. So without good will you couldn’t find any action morally right. The 2nd rule is that the action must conform to moral jurisprudence. If you follow these two Blezien 3 rules the result being good or bad is non your duty ( Kant 113 ) . Moral jurisprudence is cosmopolitan and is determined by categorical jussive moods. The usage of categorical jussive moods plays a large function in Kant’s overall moral theory. The first categorical imperative preparation is “ Act merely on that axiom that you can will as a cosmopolitan law” ( Kant 116 ) .
This categorical imperative applies to everyone and focal points on your thought procedure before you act on something. You must inquire yourself is what I’m about to make something I can O.K. of others making on the regular? If you can’t O.K. of others perpetrating the same act so your action wouldn’t pass the categorical imperative trial. Kant’s 2nd preparation is “ Always dainty humanity. whether in your ain individual or that of another. ne’er merely as a agencies but ever at the same clip as an end” ( Kant 117 ) . The 2nd categorical jussive mood applies to your single ego and everyone else.
This imperative focal points on how you should ever admit everyone’s value and being. There is ne’er a clip where you should utilize person or allow person usage you. My first clip reading about Kant’s moral theory I thought there were merely failings. After I spent more clip analysing the theory. I found that there are both strengths and failings. A strength that I found was how Kant truly expressed that everyone is to be treated every bit. Kant says that since all worlds are rational existences that we are all capable of esteeming others.
This is a strength because with everyone utilizing their moral duty to handle each other every bit things would be a batch easier. Peoples would non merely see themselves before moving on something but they would hold to do certain they are Blezien 3 sing the moral thing to make. If this thought of equality were cosmopolitan and followed by everyone ; there would be a batch less force. depression. and racial tenseness. Which would go forth everyone overall satisfied since everybody is following the moral jurisprudence. A critical failing I found in Kant’s moral theory is that he says there is a right and incorrect for everything.
This is a failing because ; there are many illustrations where utilizing good will isn’t the best reply. For illustration when I read that Kant suggested that if a slayer comes to your house ; and asked where your friend is to kill him you must state the truth. That seems a small extreme and I have to differ that would be the best thing to make. Your emotions would certainly be traveling brainsick which already makes your reply morally incorrect harmonizing to Kant. He needs to cognize where to pull the line and shouldn’t be merely on one side.
In this paper I have described the basic rules of Kant’s moral theory. I have learned that without holding a good will you can ne’er be morally right harmonizing to Kant. His categorical jussive moods show a batch of equity and equality. but when it comes down something simple like lying to person who wants to kill your friend to salvage your friends life you’re non morally right. Overall. Kant’s moral theory was really interesting to analyze how philosophers thought back so. I wonder what Kant would believe if he knew how much we allow our emotions affect our determinations.