ethics exam 3

What is the first instantiation of the Categorical Imperative? State it and explain it. (What does it mean in ordinary language?) What does it mean that it is Categorical? What does it mean that it is Imperative? What does Deontology mean?

always ask so that you can will that your maxim can become a universal law. ask yourself what it is you want to do right now categorical - what you want to do (want to lie, want to steal) maxim - rule or principle ( i lie, i steal) universalize it (everyone, everything) it is not dependent on anyone's desire to make it an imperative; it is binding not just in some situations and for some people, but always, for everyone - applies to everyone imperative is a command, obligation to carry out deontology is the theory of moral obligation, from the greek deon "that which is obligatory"

Be able to give an account of Kant: His Life and Work (Box 6.1). What books did he write? What is a "Critique?" Where did he live? What years did he live?

critique of pure reason, critique of practical reason, and critique of judgement when kant calls a book a "critique" he is not implying that he is merely writing a negative criticism of a subject; he is rather looking for the condition of a possibility of that subject konigsberg, east prussia on the baltic sea 1724-1804

What is the hypothetical imperative? When does one use the hypothetical imperative?

decisions which are conditional because they depend on the situation and on one's personal desires. dependent or conditional, on your interest in a certain outcome - the smart thing to do - commands if you want an outcome you use the hypothetical imperative if you dont want the outcome, the imperative is not binding

What does Kant say is the only thing that can be called 'good' without qualification? That is, what makes an action morally good, regardless of its consequences? Explicate this notion. Be able to discuss fully what Kant says about a good will. That is, be familiar with what Kant say regarding "a good will." To what must our intentions conform for an act to be moral?

having a good will presence of a good will is what makes an action morally good conform to a rational principle

There is an example of a woman who owns a business and is deciding to cheat her customers. Be able to discuss what the text says regarding whether she will or not. Is it moral if she can cheat them and get away with it? Why/why not? Is it moral if she does not cheat them because she may be 'found out?' Why/why not? Is it moral if she does not cheat them because she likes them? Why/why not? Is it moral if she does not cheat them because it would not be right? Why/why not?

no, because she may be found out and lose her business no, because she is only doing it to achieve good consequences no its nice, but she is only doing what she feels like doing, and we can't be expected to praise her for just wanting to feel good yes, because she wouldn't want everybody else to cheat their customers as a universal law

What does it mean for Kant that rational beings can be autonomous? Explain what autonomous means? How does being autonomous relate to rationality? How does being autonomous relate to morality?

one must be able to show that one has autonomy and can set universal morals for oneself and others a rational being belongs to the kingdom of ends as a member when he legislates in it universal laws while also himself being subject to these laws acting in accordance with one's moral duty rather than one's desires willing to do the moral law to know that you're free

Kant has immense faith in human rationality. In what way does this rationality reflect his belief as to why we as humans are privileged beings? (See the section entitled "Categorical Imperative.")

we can set up our own moral rules without having to seek guidance by going to the authorities, we need not be told how to live by the church or by the police or by the monarch or even by our parents all we need is our good will and our reason and with that we can set our own rules

What is the Kingdom of Ends? How do price and dignity relate to intrinsic and instrumental value? What is the second instantiation of the Categorical Imperative? What is the difference in price and dignity? How do price and dignity relate to intrinsic and instrumental value? Explicate the second instantiation of the Categorical Imperative with respect to the employer/employee relationship. In what way might this relationship violate the Categorical Imperative? In what way might this relationship not violate the Categorical Imperative?

we can set up our own moral rules without having to seek guidance by going to the authorities, we need not be told how to live by the church or by the police or by the monarch or even by our parents all we need is our good will and our reason and with that we can set our own rules

Explicate how the text explains how the Categorical Imperative is used to determine whether or not an action is immoral or moral. (Use the notion of lying, breaking a promise, or stealing in order to explain.) In other words, use the Categorical Imperative to determine whether or not lying, breaking a promise, or stealing is moral or immoral with respect to how the text explains. (The steps must be detailed and explicit.) Note: this can be found in the paragraph beginning "Let us go over the structure of the proposed test of right and wrong conduct again." (Again, make sure that you provide a detailed step by step answer.) Second, use the Categorical Imperative to explain whether lying, breaking a promise, or stealing is moral or immoral with respect to how it is explained in class or in the lecture notes.

what is it you're thinking of doing, if you want to steal that is what you want to do, then imagine there is a general rule for action you'll follow every time the situation comes up so "i steal" is your maxim, then imagine everyone else doing it too; by doing that you universalize your maxim so "everyone steals", then ask yourself "would this be rational? could i still get away with it if i did it?" if not then it is immoral because you wouldn't want everyone doing it all the time and you shouldn't do it either

"What makes a decision morally praiseworthy?" What does this have to do with the categorical imperative?

when the agent or person acting decides to do something because it might be applied to everyone as a universal moral law because it's not dependent on anyone's desire to make it an imperative