Markets/Morals and Immanuel Kant
Markets/Morals and Immanuel Kant PHL 2008
Popular in Social Ethics
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Thomas nelson on Friday March 18, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PHL 2008 at High Point University taught by Thaddeus M. Ostrowski in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 20 views. For similar materials see Social Ethics in PHIL-Philosophy at High Point University.
Reviews for Markets/Morals and Immanuel Kant
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 03/18/16
Thomas Nelson 2 arguments in favor of free market 1) Utilitarianism – Maximizing happiness (consequentialist argument) 2) Libertarian – Respect rights and selfownership of people involved (non consequentialist argument) 2 arguments against free market 1) Free market isn’t free or fair You have to be informed beforehand 2) Degradation of “higher goods” Certain things shouldn’t be for sale Children, self/body/labor of body 2 ways Locke “disappoints” Libertarians 1) Rights are inalienable (we don’t own ourselves absolutely) 2) Social contracts What is Enlightenment? o Emerging from immaturity o Thinking for yourself o Having the courage to use your own reason o “Dare to know!” 3 major works (critiques) o Critiques of Pure Reason (metaphysics, the true) o Critique of Practical Reason (ethics, the good) o Critique of Judgments (aesthetic, the beautiful) Also wrote “The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals” (excerpt) What gives an act moral worth? o We are responsible for our motive, not consequences – they are beyond our control (we can only control what we do and why we do it) o The belief that people are autonomous, rational beings with intrinsic value → So people shouldn’t be used To be “autonomous” is to be “a law unto oneself” o “Auto” means “self” and “nomos” means “law” o Free or “selflegislating” (acting on laws one gives oneself) “Heteronomous” is opposite – controlled by something outside o Slave to desire/inclination, follow the crowd, or blindly obey rules/law To be autonomous is not to do whatever you want, it is to be able to step back from desires or inclinations and choose how to act (or on which to get) Bentham was wrong that pleasure and pain are our “sovereign masters” What is the right motive? o It is acting out of duty, a concern or respect for the objective moral law o It is doing something because it is the right thing to do He does not trust people’s feelings because they come and go (aren’t constant) Thomas Nelson Shopkeeper and child shopper example → Did duty for the wrong reason (to protect his reputation, not because it is the right thing to do) Contrasts with Utilitarianism both in what it names as an intrinsic good o Happiness (Pleasure) vs. Human person Nonconsequentialist or Deontological theory MOTIVE ACT CONSEQUENCES JOHN STUART Greater good MILL IMMANUEL Act out of duty Act according to duty (in KANT conformity with duty) The Categorical Imperative o Necessary or required in moral sense → command Hypothetical vs. Categorical o Hypothetical is conditional takes form of an “if… then” statement (instrumental, extrinsic) o Categorical is absolute (intrinsic) 2 forms of the Categorical Imperative 1) “Act only on that maxim that you can will as a universal law” Not about consequences, but Avoiding making oneself and exception Avoiding contradicting oneself or acting in a selfdefeating way Not the “golden rule” (that is a hypothetical imperative) Ex: Lying to spare someone’s feelings (maxim) → People would lie all the time, so people couldn’t trust anything people said, therefore, people’s feelings would not be spared 2) “Always treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end” Always respect people as beings of intrinsic worth (don’t treat oneself or anything else as things) No prostitution