Friday, September 20, 2013
Circular Logic
It seems like as we get deeper into Kant, we can see that he takes both a much more applicable and practical stance on what is good. Plato spoke of lofty ideals and perfect scenarios, Aristotle on paramount rationality, and the Stoics on impractical (very much so in a modern society) fortitude and self- reliance. Kant places more trust and worth in the individual, rather than saying that the individual must act rationally in accordance to themselves, he says that the individual him or herself is actually able to recognize a moral decision and it's only clouded by what you feel compelled to do, or acting for yourself. This is possibly due to the fact that any doctrine from Kant is bound to be much more recent in it's source material, but I believe Kant has a much more fascinating way of explaining himself. He's written a few precise doctrines that all work in tandem with each other in a system of checks and balances. Placing a few stipulations on humanity, such as the ability to identify what they ought to do, he is able to describe the human condition rather spot on. Law, in the internally driven since, is what compels you to fulfill the subjective principle. The quality of will is what allows you to act either united with the objective principle, or separated. A man with a bad will but perfect autonomous Law may know which action he ought to perform, but choose to act in dis accordance, or in self interest; while a man with a good will and no autonomy will want to and try to fulfill his Duty, but may not be able to. Both of these men may do what they should some of the time, but lack a very key trait, consistency. This is why he says a good will is always a good. A drive to do what you should is key to living a moral life. Why must you do your duty? Because a human action is done not from self- interest or inclination, but it is done for the sake of duty. Why is it done for the sake of duty? Because an actions moral worth is not in the ends, but from the drive to do ones duty. Why are you driven to do your duty? Because if you have good will, it is dictated by your autonomous Law. Why do you follow the Law? Because it is your duty. Why must you do your duty?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's nice that you compare Kant to some of the previous philosophers we have read. By what you wrote in the beginning are you saying that Kant's ideas are very different from their's? After last Thursday's class I have come to think that some aspects of his beliefs are similar to Plato and Epictetus. For starters the concept that one must do what ought to be done: that sounds very similar to the citizens of Plato's society-one where the people benefit (as a whole and individually) when each performs one's duty. Of course Kant applies this to morality, and unlike Plato he places everyone on the same plane-for each individual is capable of doing his/her duty. Where I also see a possible similarity is with the Stoics. You say that their beliefs about fortitude and self-reliance are impractical, but even a Kantian would admit that an individual would need both to a degree. As we discussed in class, one may not always want to do their duty (like if you have to help a person you don't like) but if one has fortitude they can overcome those adverse emotions. Self-reliance comes into play with the Kantian idea that an action only has moral worth if done for the sake of duty, for actions done as a means to something else, or done out of inclination, have no moral worth. I'm not suggesting that Kant himself derived his ideas from these philosophers, but I feel like similarities can be seen if one thinks about.
ReplyDelete