| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "MORALITY KANT HUME": |
|
|
Morality: Kant and Hume, 2004.
Compares Immanuel Kant's and David Hume's concepts of morality.
1,130 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 3 sources, APA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a comparison and contrast of the concept of morality and morals as expressed by philosophers, Immanuel Kant and David Hume. The paper also examines each philosopher's view of God.
From the Paper
"Hume believed that all knowledge was restricted to ideas or impressions, feeling that the mind was the sum total product of a host of perceptions accumulated over time. Other than what is directly observable there is no knowledge. Hume also believed that God could not exist because God is only an idea in the mind of man. Kant, in contrast, opposed Hume's skepticism and felt that pure reason was of use in understanding the world, however he challenged enlightenment thinkers because he did..."
| |
|
Kant versus Hume, 2007.
This paper argues in favor of Immanuel Kant's philosophical outlook over that of David Hume.
2,208 words (approx. 8.8 pages), 0 sources, MLA, £ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the philosophical outlooks of Immanuel Kant and David Hume, with the author concluding that Kant's perspective is preferable. Kant's opinion on how one gains knowledge is contrasted with Hume's. Both perspectives on the contribution of experience to knowledge and the role of the "self" and a personal "world" are also considered.
Outline:
Introduction
Exposition
Conclusion
From the Paper
"In his principal book entitled, "The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals," Kant explains why only the categorical imperative is the valid standard of moral obligation (Abbott 2006, Richards 2006, McCormick 2006). He limits his discussion to specific willful actions in moral situations or conditions, where the will is, or should be, influenced only by reason or rational considerations, rather than by subjective or emotional considerations, such as laziness, convenience, or advantage . He writes that morality involves what actions are necessary and that concept comes only from reason or rational considerations. These rational considerations must, in turn, be a "single principle of obligation (Richards)." It must also be stated as a command and has no reference to, or weighed against, the consequences of the action. Kant then says that only the categorical imperative fulfills all these conditions (Richards, Abbott, McCormick)."
| |
|
Kant and Hume, 2002.
A look at how Kant attempts to solve Hume's problem.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 1 source, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the cause and effect problem that Hume elaborated on and the metaphysical beliefs of Kant in relation to the problem.
| |
|
Kant and Morality, 2005.
This paper looks at Kant's beliefs on morality.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 16.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the writer examines Kant's beliefs on morality and the universal good of will. The writer compares Hume's ideas on morality with those of Kant. In this article, the writer's opinion on this matter is also expressed.
From the Paper
"Kant believed that will is the only thing inherently good without qualification and that we should behave according to the maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. By behaving this way a person is hoping that everyone else will behave this way in the future and so good will can be spread. Kant maintained that the expression of the moral law provides a concrete practical method for evaluating particular human actions of different types. For instance if ... "
| |
|
Hume and The Foundation of Morality, 1983.
This paper discusses David Hume's use of reason and sentiment as a means of discussing the origins of morality.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 2 sources, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
David Hume, in "An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals", delves into the foundations of morality. He divides the origins of morality into two possible sources, reason and sentiment. He defines reason as that facility or quality or action that "can instruct us in the tendency of qualities and actions, and point out their beneficial consequences to society. He defines sentiment as the emotional disposition that guides reason. In example after example Hume makes it clear that reason should be regarded as a qualitative tool that helps us define our world. Without sentiment as the spur, reason would not be employed effectively ."
| |
|
Hume and Kant, 2007.
A discussion regarding the relationship between David Hume and Immanuel Kant.
2,135 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the crucial connection between David Hume to Immanuel Kant. The paper aims to show that their respective philosophies are in essence the same. The paper reports that because they gave rise to such divergent traditions, they are generally analysed as being philosophically apart.
From the Paper
"Immanuel Kant was a rabid Newtonian, and indeed an active scientist, until a blinding realisation took over him on coming across a remark of Hume's. He is credited with the nebular hypothesis of planetary formation, originated while he taught mathematics and Newton's physics at the University of Konigsberg. After his momentous realisation he dedicated the rest of life to philosophy alone. The contention of Hume is that reason must be directed to the human sphere, and must be serving passions, not abstractions in the head. But such reasoning must have a moral substratum if it is not to revert to Hobbesian anarchy - the war of all against all. This is where Hume fails, because though he does advance a morality - the utilitarian argument, "the greatest good of the greatest number" - it remains cold and calculating, thus devoid of inspiration value. Kant fills this lack. "
| |
|
Philosophy - Hume and Kant, 2002.
An analysis of the pholiosphies of Hume and Kant
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 2 sources, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay explains Hume's arguments about reasoning and experience and Kant's analytic and synthetic judgments.
| |
|
Aquinas, Hume, Kant & Drug Laws, 1996.
Examines ethical & political philosophies & applies them indirectly to issue of drug legalization.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 4 sources, £ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Drug abuse is seen as a major social problem that has been the occasion for a massive effort on the part of the U.S. government to interdict drugs before they arrive in the United States, to use criminal sanctions to stop traffic in drugs in American communities, and to place a stigma on drug use so as to control it and to influence successive generations not to take up drug abuse in the first place. This effort has been very costly in terms of money and human suffering. The fact that drugs are illegal has created a vast underground market for them and has contributed to the rising crime rates in our communities as drug abusers steal and commit murder in order to get the money they need to purchase their drugs. The perception that the drug war has been a failure has contributed to calls for legalization..."
| |
|
David Hume & Immanuel Kant, 1997.
Compares philosophers' theories on psychology, knowledge, perception, experience and causality.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 4 sources, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" HUME & KANT
This research compares and contrasts the theories of knowledge of David Hume and Immanuel Kant. First, each philosopher's general views are discussed individually. Then their specific theories of knowledge are discussed individually. Finally, their theories are compared and contrasted.
David Hume was a philosopher and historian. He wrote A Treatise of Human Nature in 1739, which was considered his most important work for psychology; he later changed the beginning of the Treatise into what was called An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Hume defined his investigation as the science of human nature. He believed that people were natural objects in the world of nature which could be studied by methods of natural science. He believed that the operations of mental life could be.."
| |
|
Hume as a Moral Skeptic, 2005.
An analysis of David Hume's moral theory in his "Treatise of Human Nature" to determine if he fits two definitions of a moral skeptic.
1,325 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how in his "Treatise of Human Nature", Hume reduces moral decision making to autonomous conflicting passions motivating the will. He also excludes reason as a guiding entity and therefore appears to be a moral skeptic. It discusses how he fits Marcus Singer's definition of a moral skeptic by determinism. However, it also contends that by J.L. Mackie's definitions, he does not seem to be a normative moral or a meta ethical skeptic.
From the Paper
"Foremost, partly by divorcing reason from the motivation of the will and partly due to the natural causes of the passions, Hume plainly implicates himself as a moral skeptic by Singer's definition of determinism. According to the Treatise the will is directly motivated only by the direct passions and, in turn, the direct passions arise from good and evil. Reason takes a backseat as its role is simply to connect the passions with their correct objects. However, it is when Hume reduces the definitions of good and evil to sensations of pleasure and pain that he seems to affirm his position as a skeptic by determinism. Furthermore, he states: "the direct passions frequently arise from a natural impulse or instinct which is perfectly unaccountable." "
| |
|
Hume, Moral Philosophy and Psychological Oppression, 2006.
An application of David Hume's moral philosophy to the concept of psychological oppression as described by Sandra Bartky.
1,477 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how oppression of all forms, whether based on race, sex, or another arbitrary characteristic, by the Humean conception is always morally wrong. It looks at how Hume identifies justice as an artificial virtue that has the sole purpose of restraining individuals' base impulses for the communal benefit. It also argues that discriminatory oppression is unjust because it does not have the import of natural morality, nor is it in the service of the communal interest.
From the Paper
"In the perpetration of psychological oppression, there exists a naturally vicious quality that Humaen principles identify as morally wrong. Psychological oppression, as conceptualized within a feminist framework by Sandra Bartky, is a cruel authority exerted by the force of one's own ideas. Bartky originated the concept to describe the process by which women internalize and perpetuate their subordinate status with a patriarchal society, though it is applicable to any arbitrarily subordinated population. Psychological oppression effectually facilitates the continued acquiescence to an unjust power that resided outside of the self, a power that is the original source and beneficiary of the self-oppressing ideas, such as stereotypes and essentialized inferiority. "
| |
|
Hume and Moral judgments, 2006.
An analysis of Hume's opinions on statements and moral judgements.
735 words (approx. 2.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper begins with a story of a hypothetical situation. It then discusses Hume's opinion and his premise that all statements are either analytic or synthetic. The paper then describes and gives examples of analytic and synthetic statements.
From the Paper
"Consider the story above. Most people would say it was immoral for me to cut the line. However, once I explained I was a doctor, the woman that complained apologized for saying what she said. Her original perception was that I was wrong, but her perception changed even though my action did not. Further, most people would say that taking the coffee that I did not order was immoral. I think it is immoral, too. However, it is possible that my opinion would change."
| |
|
Emotion and Morality, 2007.
This paper explores Immanuel Kant and David Hume's ideas on morality and emotions.
939 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses Kant's belief that fulfilling responsibilities could only be a rational choice, as opposed to an emotional choice. The paper looks at Hume who, on the contrary, believed that moral judgments were related to sentiments. The paper explains how Kant and Hume apply their theories to women. The paper concludes that Hume's theory of morality would appear to be the most applicable to human beings of the 21st century.
From the Paper
"Immanuel Kant devised the categorical imperative in relation to morality. In the categorical imperative moral decisions were "objective, rational and freely chosen" (Cash sec. 1). Morality, according to Kant, could not be determined by the emotions of a human being. This is because morals require the decision making to be associated with the duties that each person is required to fulfill. Kant argued that fulfilling responsibilities could only be a rational choice because emotions would lead the person to consider only what he wanted, rather than what needed to be done. Consequently the individual had to accomplish moral actions based on principles, which could not be related to emotions because emotions were subjective, while principles were factual (Cash sec. 1)."
| |
|
The Origin of Morality, 2005.
An analysis of David Hume's theory of the origin of morality.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents an explanation of David Hume's theory of the origin of morality in human sentiments. It describes Hume's reduction of morals to feelings of pleasure, pain, fear and sympathy. It also discusses Hume's view that for the "enlightened" individual, ethical altruism rather than ethical egoism should be pursued.
From the Paper
" David Hume was an eighteenth century philosopher and historian. Hume believed that the biggest obstacle to improvement in the moral or metaphysical sciences was what he referred to as the obscurity of the ideas and ambiguity of the ..."
|
|
|
