Bio Med Ethics: Kant and Deontological Ethics

The Principle of Autonomy

"Act in regard to all persons in ways that treat them as ends in themselves and never simply as means to accomplish the ends of others." Part of what it means to have reason and free will is to be autonomous—self governing. When we use people, we violate this autonomy and no longer treat them as people, but as objects or things. In health care... Patient's Bill of Rights Informed Consent Advance Directives All based on the idea of patient autonomy

Principle of Humanity as An End in Itself

"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means."

The Principle of Universality

"Act only from those personal rules that you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws." THIS IS A BASIS FOR THE ETHICS OF RIGHTS

Kant maintains that an act has moral worth if and only if:

(1) it is right (or in accord with duty) and (2) it is done because it is right (or from duty).

The Perfect and Imperfect Duties

-The perfect duties: duties of justice. +Prohibited: They are necessary and ought never be violated. +The perfect duties include: The duty one has to never harm oneself or anyone else. The duty one has to others to keep her promises and to tell the truth. -The imperfect duties: duties of beneficence, charity and kindness. +Not prohibited: Violating these duties isn't prohibited. +The imperfect duties include: The duty one has to others to assist those in need. The duty one has to oneself to develop one's talents. Perfect duties are said to trump imperfect duties...

Although Kant was himself a Pietist...

... he tried to develop his philosophy (and ethics) without any reference to religion. Kant may have been influenced by Pietism in his view of man and his view of the world, but he never refers to his religious background in his philosophical writings.

The concept of acting out of duty, goes back at least to the ancient Hebrews and relates to...

...Divine Command Theory.

Indian philosophy, in the Bhagavad Gita, is very clear on the importance of following one's duty. Krishna, a Hindu god, tells the warrior Arjuna that it is his ...

...duty to fight, and that he should not concern himself with consequences. This is non-consequentialist, deontological ethics.

Kant proposed a view of morality that was based on...

...duty. Kant is regarded as the author of deontological ethics.

Greek word, deon, meaning...

...duty. Plato suggests a duty to be just (Republic, and a duty to obey laws (Crito).

Deontological ethics is a tradition that is...

...non-consequentialist. Was expressed by Emmanuel Kant

A duty is...

...something one is required to do. It is an obligation, a responsibility.

In an essay written near the end of his life, Kant maintained that...

...you are never justified in telling a lie. Beliefs about causality—if you do the right thing, you are not responsible for bad outcomes. Are exceptions possible for Kant? Yes, but only as long as they can be consistently universalized

Kant's duty-based theory holds the following things:

1. Duties are absolute obligations that you must follow through with regardless of your personal feelings or inclinations. 2. Duties apply to all of us in the exact same way without exception 3. Your will determines the morality of an act- not the outcome

Two Conceptions of Duty

1. Duty as following orders -Duty is external -Duty is imposed by others 2. Duty as freely imposing obligation on one's own self -The Kantian model -Duty is internal -We impose duty on ourselves (This second conception of duty is much more morally advanced than the first.)

Kantian Problems with Consequentialism

1. No act is right or wrong in itself (no matter how "horrific" or "evil"); 2. We are not morally responsible, autonomous, or free if we naturally seek to produce good consequences. If that is the case, then we are not morally responsible. 3. Because of various contextual reasons (e.g., education; background; psychology; etc), there is vast disagreement on what "counts" as good consequences. Different people have different ideas of good and bad. 4. How can we be held responsible for consequences that are often out of our control? We can't even control the long-range consequences...we don't even know what they may become? Moreover, where do we draw the line of responsibility?

Kant's Shopkeepers Kant compares two shopkeepers who both give correct change: The first is honest because he is scared of being caught if he tries to cheat his customers. The second is honest because it is his duty to be honest.

According to Kant, only the second shopkeeper is behaving morally.

Alternatives to Kant-Ross's non-absolutist deontology

1. W. D. Ross held that there are various prima facie duties that we know about in a a priori way (e.g., 'you should not lie', 'you should help others', etc.). 2. Further, Ross held that, in any given case where there are multiple prima facie duties in play, we should obey the prima facie duty that is most pressing

What are my duties, according to reason?

A duty to preserve reason. A duty to preserve truth. -This duty is necessary to preserve reason. A duty to preserve life. -This duty is necessary to preserve my reason. A duty to preserve freedom. -This duty is necessary to preserve reason and the inquiry after truth.

To Kant, what separates humans from non-humans is our ability to REASON.

According to Kant it is this faculty that enables us to act freely against our instincts and desires if we so choose.

What is human nature, according to DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS?

According to Kant, people have duties because they have been commanded by reason—not the reason of others, but their own human reason.

CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

Are absolute and unconditional moral commands. The form of a categorical imperative is: "You ought to X." (X = END-IN-ITSELF, without regards to MEANS or other ENDS) An example of a categorical imperative is: "You ought to study [because you are a student]." "Act as if the maxim from which you were to act were to become through your will a general law."

HYPOTHETICAL IMPERATIVES

Are commands that are not absolute, but conditional, and premised on one's desires. The form of a hypothetical imperative is: "If you want Y, you ought to X." (Y = goal/consequence/end; X = means) An example of a hypothetical imperative is: "If you want to pass this test, you ought to study."

Respect for people

As well as this, Kant wrote that people should be respected and 'ends' in themselves, never used as 'means to ends'. Kant believed there was something that separates human and non-human beings: the ability to understand and use the concepts of duty and reason. To Kant, 'animals' are dominated by instinct and desire, their behaviour shaped by these compulsions.

Deontological Theories compared to Consequentialist theories

Consequentialist moral theories: 1. Put the good before the right 2. They first specify what good is of value. -What is right is just whatever maximizes what's good. 3. So it is the consequences or end results that matter... Deontological moral theories: 1. Put the right before the good. 2. Do not: -first specify some good and then determine what is right by asking what will maximize that good. 3. Instead, Deontological theories determine what is right through some other method: -and direct you to do what is right even if some other act would produce greater happiness. 4. But Deontological theories don't think consequences don't matter. -They think consequences are not the only thing that matters...

Strengths of Kant's theory

Doing one's duty deserves admiration. Duty is evenhanded - treat everyone in the same way Respect other persons

Immanuel Kant

German philosopher one of the most influential thinkers of modern Europe and the last major philosopher of the Enlightenment The Enlightenment, which advocated Reason as a means to establishing an authoritative system of aesthetics, ethics, government, and logic, to allow philosophers to obtain objective truth about the universe. Kant's philosophy has had a profound impact on Western moral, political, and legal traditions.

Kant was a retributivist.

He believed that the punishment should fit the crime. He thought that people who committed crimes had ceded their rationality, and were therefore less than human, and could so be treated. Commit the crime, do the time. They've become less human.

Duty and Reason

He felt that using reason you can think about what's right to do based on how you think you should act. According to Kant there should be no attention paid to consequences (unlike Utilitarianism) because they are far too difficult to predict and don't take into account your motivation.

RIGHTS AND DUTIES

If we act on the assumption that we have rights because of the principle of autonomy/respect, we must act on the assumption that others have rights as well, because of the principle of universality. If we have a duty to protect our rights, we have a duty to protect the rights of others as well. Rights correlate with duties. If I have a right, others have the duties to respect that right. If I have a right by virtue of my autonomy, then others have rights as well, and I have a duty to respect those rights. A legitimate right is a claim that can limit the freedom of others. Some duties are determined by special roles that we have, and so do not directly correlate with others' rights.

Duty

Immanuel Kant was all about duty. A moral person is one who acts from a sense of duty and not from what we personally would like to do. Acting morally amounts to doing our duty regardless of what consequences may follow, even for ourselves.

Is Deontological Ethics Relativist or Universalist?

It is obvious that Kantian deontological ethics rejects ethical relativism, since one of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative is the Principle of Universality. We all have duties, just because of our common humanity.

An imperative is a command to act.

It is prescriptive. There are two kinds of imperatives: 1. HYPOTHETICAL imperative 2. CATEGORICAL imperatives

Jenny's Cookies Jenny buys cookies for her grandma but accidentally gets ones with nuts. Her grandma has an allergic reaction and almost dies.

Jenny's cookies is an example of why Kant totally rejected outcomes as a way of judging acts. 1. Things can turn out well even when we don't intend them to 2. Things can turn out terribly even when we mean well.

Kant's absolutism

Kant held that any act that directly attacks another person, even a despicable person, is a case of mere-means treatment and hence is morally wrong. Kant even argued that it would be wrong to lie to a murderer about the location of his intended victim.

If a woman runs up to your door and asks that you take her in because her husband is trying to kill her, deontology says that you can take her in. You get a knock on the door and its a man with an ax. He asks you if you saw the women.

Kant said that it is an absolute duty to tell the truth because whatever happens to the women would not be on your conscience. Lying is wrong. You can't control the consequences.

Maxims

Maxims, according to Kant, are subjective rules that guide action. -Relevant Act Description -Sufficient Generality All actions have maxims, such as, -Never lie to your friends. -Never act in a way that would make your parents ashamed of you. -Always watch out for number one.

Weaknesses of Kant's theory

Neglect of moral integration - duty and inclination need to be integrated along with split between reason and emotion Role of emotions neglected Consequences ignored

What are the characteristics of treating people as ends in themselves?

Not denying them relevant information Allowing them freedom of choice

Disadvantages of Deontological Ethics:

One important argument against Kant's absolute moral rules has to do with the possibility of resolving cases of moral conflict. E.g., the "Case of lying to the Nazis" presents a conflict between the duty to preserve life and the duty to preserve truth. Another important argument against Kant's absolute moral rules has to do with the difficulty of doing one's duty. Doing one's duty could result in the loss of one's happiness, property, and the lives of one's loved ones, as well as one's own life. Kantian ethics is "over-intellectuallized", ignores feelings in favor of reason, is overly masculine in its orientation. What about schizophrenics, and persons in comas, or with low cognitive ability? Do we share the same concept of 'duty' universally? Can we really apply a moral rule like not killing others to every situation?

Kant supported capital punishment for capital crimes

Rational beings who freely choose their conduct are responsible for their actions. We are treating them in accordance with their own application of the Categorical Imperative. "His own evil deed draws the punishment on himself."

Ross's non-absolutist deontology

Regarding the Gestapo case- Ross would say that there are two prima facie duties in play, that of truth-telling and that of relieving distress; He would say that lying to the Gestapo is right, because in this case the prima facie duty to relieve distress is more pressing than the prima facie duty to tell the truth. Ross may appear to be a consequentialist (i.e., it may seem that he maintains that rightness = maximizing overall goodness). But Ross is not a consequentialist. -For instance, Ross says that, if by keeping a promise to A you could bring about 1,000 units of good, and if by doing some favor for B (to whom you have not made a promise) you could bring about 1,001 units of good, you should keep your promise to A, even though it brings about less overall goodness. (Deontologists say that you should keep promise A because it is your duty. Nothing to do with the consequences because you can't control the consequences anyway.) Similar to utilitarianism

In the matter of punishment, Kant despised the Utilitarians who said that punishment should be rehabilitative.

Rehabilitating a criminal violates the humanity categorical imperative. He believed that rehabilitation was using people as a means to an end, because we are trying to mold people into what we think they should be.

Ross's non-absolutist deontology

Suppose that you have promised to meet a friend for lunch (to catch up with each other), and Suppose that, on the way there, you see someone desperate for help on the side of the road. Here there are two prima facie duties in play, that of keeping promises and that of relieving distress. In this case Ross would say that you should help the person on the side of the road, because in this case the prima facie duty to relieve distress is more pressing than the prima facie duty to keep promises Deontologist says that you keep that promise, that going to lunch is your obligation. Non-absolutist weighs their decisions. You should stop for the person on the side of the road.

Principle of Double Effect (PDE)

The PDE does not allow for lying to the Gestapo to save your Jewish friends, or for the killing of one innocent to save many other innocents, etc., The PDE does allow for: -self-defense against an aggressor, -for switching a trolley that is about to run five people over onto a track where it will instead only run one person over, and -for other sorts of actions that may on their face appear to be inconsistent with absolutism about deontological constraints.

In the Chinese philosophy of Confucius, it is clear that acting ethically out of motivation for righteousness is better than being motivated by benefit (good consequences).

Therefore, Confucius was an early non-consequentialist, deontological ethicist

Kant felt that what is right is what you feel you ought to do.

We can understand what we ought to do by using practical reason.

Advantages of Deontological Ethics:

While divine command theory and natural law ethics are "top-down", Kantian ethics is "bottom-up". Like social contract ethics, it has its origin in human beings, in their autonomy, their freedom and their reason.

Negative duties specify what SHOULD NOT be done:

You ought NOT do X! e.g., "You shall not kill!"

Positive duties specify what SHOULD be done:

You ought to X! e.g., "Honor your father and mother!"

Pietism

a form of Lutheran Christianity that stressed religious devotion, humility, and a literal interpretation of the Bible.

What is human nature, according to Deontological ethics?

human beings have rationality, and that through this rationality they have freedom. Freedom to choose is the basis of morality. Kant therefore disagrees with Hume's Theory of Moral Sentiments, and with utilitarianism.

Kant offers four formulations of the categorical imperative (the CI).

autonomy formulation of the CI* kingdom of ends formulation of the CI universal law formulation of the CI* humanity formulation of the CI*

An indirect duty is a duty we have to a pseudo-person:

e.g. "Do not take the lives of other humans' animals! (pets, livestock)"

A direct duty is a duty we have toward a person:

e.g. "Do not take your own life!" "Do not take the lives of other (humans)!

In duties to others, the agent and the patient(s) are different:

e.g., "Do not take the lives of others!" "Help others when possible!"

In duties to self, the agent and the patient are the same:

e.g., "Do not take your own life!" "Develop your talents!"

Alternatives to Kant-The Principle of Double Effect (the PDE)

in cases where an act will have two effects (one good and one bad), the act is morally permissible if and only if the following conditions obtain: (1) the act is not in itself wrong (e.g., as lying is), (2) the bad effect is not intended or directly willed (the bad effect may be foreseen and tolerated - but it may not be intended or directly willed, and this should be understood to entail that the good effect must not flow from or be achieved through the bad effect), and (3) the good effect outweighs the bad effect.

Different kinds of deontological duties:

positive and negative duties duties to self and duties to others direct duties and indirect duties

Retributivism

the belief that people deserve whatever they get for their wrong-doing. They had the will to commit the crime They had the will to accept the penalty Therefore, it would be morally wrong not to penalize the criminal.

Divine Command Theory

the idea that we have a duty to obey God, and therefore a duty to do or not do whatever God has commanded us to do or not do. is a moral theory, and moral theology, but, strictly speaking, it is not normative moral philosophy.