| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "FORMULATIONS KANT CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE": |
|
|
The First and Second Formulations of Kant's "Categorical Imperative", 2001.
This paper explores the first and second formulations of Emmanuel Kant's "Categorical Imperative" and cites evidence that the two can indeed work together, contrary to prominent interpretation.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 0 sources, £ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is centrally interested in the definition of "objectivity" in the work of E. Kant, particularly in relation to his first first and second formulations of the categorical imperative. This paper explores the conventional interpretation of the notion of objectivity, and then offers a modernized understanding of the term.
From the Paper
"This essay holds that the application of the first and second formulations of Kant?s moral doctrine the categorical imperative?the purpose of which is to determine the morality of human action?can and must be applied in conjunction. When applied in conjunction, it is shown that the two formulations prohibit and enjoin the same actions for the same reason. First, this essay explores the conventional interpretation of the first and second formulations of the categorical imperative. After mentioning the primary fault of this interpretation?namely, the confusion surrounding the interpretation of the terms ?objective? or ?objectivity?? a new interpretation is suggested."
| |
|
Kant's "Categorical Imperative", 2002.
This essay elaborates on what Immanuel Kant calls the "Categorical Imperative" or what he believes to be man's one criterion for moral obligation.
1,060 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This work deals with Kant's understanding of the basis for moral actions taken from his work entitled "The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals". He believes that there is one criterion for moral obligation which he refers to as the "categorical imperative". A large part of this essay discusses the four ways in which this "categorical imperative" can be formulated.
From the Paper
"In presenting the one criterion for moral obligation, Immanuel Kant first rejects other moral traditions before his time: among them, the virtue theory, which bases morality on good character traits; and the consequential theory, which bases it on the consequences of actions. In response, he argues that moral actions are based only on a ?supreme principle of morality? ? one that is objective, rational and freely chosen -- which he called the categorical imperative."
| |
|
Kant's Categorical Imperative, 1974.
This paper will examine the third formula of Kant's categorical imperative by scrutinizing the four illustrations he uses to prove his point.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 0 sources, £ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This paper will examine the third formula of Kant's categorical imperative by scrutinizing the four illustrations he uses to prove his point. The categorical imperative is an attempt at a formal law which, if followed, will dictate and result in moral action. In the third formula of the categorical imperative Kant states that one must: "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end." According to Kant this rule should fit any moral situation and any situation which does not fit this formula cannot be moral. It is this contention - that he has found a set of absolute guidelines - which will be questioned.
As a means, for it will be shown here that they are not ends in themselves, of supporting his third formula Kant employs four ... "
| |
|
Categorical Imperative, Good Will and Duty According Kant, 2004.
An analysis of Kant's moral theory according to "The Foundation of the Metaphysics of Morals" that argues Kant's philosophy is overly simplistic.
1,300 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper first explains Kant's theory of universal law, and defines key concepts and terms. The paper then goes on to argue that Kant ignores conflicting duties and external factors in morality. This argument is supported by hypothetical examples and quotes from philosopher Thomas Nagel's book, "The Last Word".
From the Paper
"Human beings guide their actions by instincts and selfish desires. How could it be possible to act differently? The philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote The Foundation of the Metaphysics of Morals as a set of axioms [principles or postulates] that can be used in constructing moral laws based on the use of reason. Kant in his ethics takes his point of departure from the concept of good will: "nothing in the world can possibly be conceived which could be called good without qualifications except a good will." (Kant, 1959, p.9)"
| |
|
Categorical Imperative, 2002.
This paper discusses Immanuel Kant?s famous argument that his Categorical Imperative is fundamentally different and superior to the greatly flawed Golden Rule.
1,190 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, £ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper agrees with Kant that the Categorical Imperative is very different from the Golden Rule. The author believes that the Categorical Imperative is clearly independent of the sentiment regarding the self; whereas, the Golden Role?s moral strength comes directly from, and is dependent on, a sentiment regarding the self. The author concludes that the Golden Rule seems much more consistent with the irrational mess that is human morality and behavior and is an invaluable and simple tool for guiding moral decisions than is the Categorical Imperative.
From the Paper
"Kant himself more succinctly states his Categorical Imperative as "Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Under Kant?s Categorical Imperative, an action can only be considered moral if it fulfils three important criteria. First, the action must be judged to be universally acceptable. Second, the action must be judged to respect the dignity of persons. Finally, the judged action must be acceptable to rational people. Further, the Categorical Imperative must always be followed regardless of individual self-interest."
| |
|
Emmanuel Kant and Lying, 2008.
A comparison of Emmanuel Kant's categorical imperative and utilitarianism with regards to lying.
955 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Emmanuel Kant's philosophy on lying and compares it to the philosophy of utilitarianism. It describes Kant's categorical imperative and how it can be utilized in a situation that may involve lying. The paper presents a case where there is a question of whether to lie or not and discusses the possible philosophies of how to deal with the dilemma.
From the Paper
"At first, utilitarianism seems perfect for resolving such a dilemma. The problem is that the utilitarian is focused only on happiness, and happiness in this dilemma is false. The person's happiness also is just temporary and will end sooner or later, anyway. For a person who is faced with such a dilemma, the most helpful idea is Kant's categorical imperative. The reason is that it shows a practical point about human beings. It is not always wrong to lie because sometimes the truth is as bad as or worse than the lie. The only way to make a decision is to ask whether what we will do should be done by all individuals who happen to be faced with the same dilemma. When we are faced with an impossible or really difficult situation, then the categorical imperative provides a means to deal with that dilemma."
| |
|
Kant's Law of Morality, 2003.
A description and analysis of Kant?s Categorical Imperative.
2,487 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how Immanuel Kant is a very controversial philosopher and how he argues from a Deontological standpoint that actions are determined as good in themselves, not by their consequences. It describes Kant?s moral law and his Categorical Imperative and then offers a critique of Kant, based on the fact that he contradicts himself, he does not allow for satisfaction from good will, and his moral theory is fundamentally flawed.
From the Paper
"Kant then gives us the first formulation of the categorical imperative. ?Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law? (P. 312). In other words, before you act, you should consider upon what principle you are acting. Then be sure that it is reasonable to will that that particular principle be a universal law applicable to everyone at every time. Kant gives four examples to illustrate this point (I will discuss two of them). One of the examples is of a man who has been going through a series of misfortunes and is considering suicide. His maxim is that due to self-love, it is acceptable to take your own life to prevent the evil that its longer duration would bring. But this cannot be adopted as a universal law of nature."
| |
|
Contrasts Between the 'Universal Law' and 'End In Itself' In Kant's "Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals"., 2002.
This paper addresses differences between two versions of the famous categorical imperative in Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals. These formulations deal with the universal/objective and individual/subjective views of moral and ethical action
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 1 source, £ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses differences between two versions of the famous categorical imperative in Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals. These formulations deal with the universal/objective and individual/subjective views of moral and ethical actions. There is some discrepancy between what ethical 'results' each formulation delivers, which is discussed in the paper.
| |
|
Physician-Assisted Suicide, 2000.
An applicatiopn of ethical ideas of relativism, utilitarianism and Kant's Categorical Imperative to morality of physician-assisted suicide.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Physician-assisted suicide is a troubling issue which involves at least two moral actors -- the patient who makes a decision as to whether to live or die, and the physician who decides whether to assist or not. The real moral issue is faced by the physician, for it is he or she who will make the decision which changes a suicide to a physician-assisted suicide. Different moral systems can be applied to this issue.
The concept of right to die pertains to individual control over the process of dying. It remains unclear whether assisted suicide, which may include termination of life support, should be acceptable and legal or to what extent its practice can be regulated to protect the vulnerable and guard against abuse.
Self-determination is a central issue in the debate regarding end-of-life decisions, which includes the right to die...."
| |
|
Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals, 2002.
An examination on Nietzsche's view of Kantian categorical imperative philosophy.
1,852 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Nietzsche ultimately argues that Kantian reason in justifying the categorical imperative is enslaving. It explains that not only is the logic of the categorical imperative enslaving, but also it is ultimately cruel because it restricts the freedom of individuals and holds back the good from prospering. The categorical imperative argues that there is an inherent value to morality and that doing one?s moral duty is an imperative.
From the Paper
"Kant further argues that actions can only be called moral if they are undertaken only for their own sake without regard to their ends and without regard to the specific of the situation. One must be willing to will his actions as a universal law in order for them to be considered moral. Nietzsche soundly denies this concept, arguing that morals don?t have intrinsic value but derive their meaning from a historical event. Morals are contextual, and, even worse, a degradation and perversion of the natural order. Nietzsche discusses the manner in which morality developed to enslave the stronger among humanity, and how this historical ?slave revolt in morality? has served to cruelly enslave man. Nietzsche believes that ?bad conscience? has served to enslave humanity and pervades all of culture, rendering it cruel, harmful, and unnatural. In science, Nietzsche momentarily locates the possibility of an antidote to the morality of ?good and evil,? but due to the significance it places on truth, Nietzsche ultimately dismisses it, too. Only by transcending conventional Judeo-Christian morality can the cruelty of the culture of the categorical imperative ultimately be overcome."
| |
|
The Present Cross-Cultural Imperative In Social Psychology, 2002.
Presents the case for cross-cultural research in the social sciences.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 20 sources, £ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
If the purpose of social science, at large, involves the testing of possible theories and models for social improvement, it will have to contend with what at first appear to be complicating factors in increased numbers of places and situations in which cross or inter-cultural dynamics are at work.
| |
|
Questioning the U.S.'s Preemptive Imperative, 2004.
An argument for rethinking the "preemptive strike doctrine" and the duty that the United States Government takes on to protect the world.
3,063 words (approx. 12.3 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Times have changed, and the days of "big-stick politics" need to be reexamined. The U.S.'s "Duty To Prevent" should be replaced with the UN's proposal of "The Responsibility to Protect." With legitimacy, bureaucracy and desirability of such policies in mind, this paper examines the necessity of a reevaluation of the U.S.'s policies in world politics intervention.
From the Paper
"Political scientists and historians alike often refer to the days of 'big-stick politics' and nuclear arms racing as political dynamics of the past, left in the dust after the end of the Cold War. To many, this Hobbesian period marked a barbarous element of politics that is now past, replaced by the optimistic presence of TANs, NGOs, nuclear nonproliferation treaties, and human rights norm dissemination. "
| |
|
The Ethical Arguments of Kant and Mill, 2005.
This paper explores the similarities between the ethical theories of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill.
1,282 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Immanuel Kant's and John Stuart Mill's systems of ethical behavior and shows their similarities in how both are concerned with the moral and ethical duties of the individual with regards to the whole of humanity. The paper reveals how both theories are incomplete; Kant's "Categorical Imperative" suffers from the contradiction that arises when moral actions engender immoral consequences, while Mill's Utilitarianism fails to provide an unambiguous way to judge individual moral actions.
From the Paper
"Immanuel Kant, in The Foundations of the Metaphysic of Morals, puts forth a deontological theory of moral action in a trio of formulations called the "Categorical Imperative". It is considered deontological because it is concerned solely with what one "ought" to do, rather than the consequences of action. Thus the determination of ethical behavior is based upon an obligation to act according to a rational principle which is itself universal, absolute, and unconcerned with the consequences. This foundational aspect of the theory is rendered problematic when moral actions create immoral circumstances. If the Categorical Imperative holds all untruths to be immoral, then honestly answering a murderer who requests that one identify the intended victim would be a morally right action that results in a morally objectionable murder."
| |
|
Kant's Ethics and the Homeless, 2005.
Uses Kant's rules of ethics to examine society's due to the homeless.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 1 source, £ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A Kantian rule of ethics, one which follows universal law and the categorical imperative as seen in his work on the Metaphysics of Morals, is used in this paper to discuss the common problem of homelessness that plagues our society. Kantians would say that altruistic caring is our duty to the homeless based on the objective and end-before-means ethical principles laid down by his categorical imperative.
From the Paper
"During his serious and sequestered life in Konigsberg, the 18th century German philosopher and ethicist, Immanuel Kant, laid down some very stringent and thought out moral principles. One of these, the categorical imperative, is defined in his groundbreaking work, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals. This principle is still taught and used by ethicists over two centuries later, and is a prime example of a strict ethical rule upon which Kant believed individuals in society should base their actions. The categorical imperative, in Kant's words is "namely, this: Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (Kant 38). What Kant is arguing is that what is ethical cannot be subjective, cannot consider a means above an end, but must be selfless and objective."
|
|
|
