Deck 6: Kantian Ethics

Question 1

Talk about:
-Absolute

Answer 1

moral rules are absolute if and only if it is never permitted to break them.

Question 2

Talk about:
-Categorical Imperative

Answer 2

a command of reason that requires us to act in a certain way regardless of whether doing so will get us anything we care about.

Question 3

Talk about:
-Hypothetical imperative

Answer 3

a command of reason that tell us to do whatever is needed to get what we care about.

Question 4

Talk about:
-Maxim

Question 5

Talk about:
-Paternalism

Question 6

Talk about:
-Principle of humanity

Question 7

Talk about:
-Principle of universalizability

Question 8

Talk about:
-Universalizable

Question 9

What does it mean for a moral duty to be absolute? Give an example of a moral duty (besides the principle of universalizability) that Kant believed to be absolute. Does the principle of universalizability require us to regard this moral duty as absolute? Why or why not?

Question 10

Write an essay explaining Kant's principle of humanity. State the principle clearly and define any key terms. Give examples to make clear how we are supposed to apply the principle. Does this principle provide a better test of the morality of actions than the principle of universalizability? Why or why not?

Question 11

Write an essay presenting in detail what you take to be the strongest objection to Kant's principle of humanity. Explain the objection and then formulate the strongest reply you can on Kant's behalf. Do you think the objection succeeds? Why or why not?

Question 12

Compare and contrast Kant's principle of humanity with his principle of universalizability. Are there any cases where the two principles render conflicting verdicts about the moral status of an action? If so, do you think one of the principles could be revised to make them consistent? If not, why do you think that the principles will always agree?

Question 13

Kant claims that the only thing that can be said to be good "without limitation" is

A) happiness.
B) the full development of human potential.
C) the good will.
D) kindness.

Question 14

According to Kant, actions have moral worth only if they

A) do not harm anyone.
B) are done from duty.
C) maximize happiness.
D) are motivated by benevolence.

Question 15

Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative requires assessing the

A) maxim on which one is acting.
B) consequences of one's actions.
C) emotions prompting one's actions.
D) character traits of the person performing the actions.

Question 16

Kant's second formulation of the categorical imperative requires that we

A) treat all living creatures with respect.
B) treat the weak and vulnerable with special care.
C) maximize happiness.
D) treat human beings as ends in themselves.

Question 17

According to Kant's theory, telling a white lie is

A) morally required.
B) morally permissible.
C) morally impermissible.
D) sometimes morally permissible and sometimes morally impermissible.

Question 18

According to Kant, the consequences of an action

A) determine the moral status of that action.
B) are relevant to but do not determine the moral status of that action.
C) are irrelevant to the moral status of that action.
D) are sometimes relevant and sometimes irrelevant to the moral status of that action.

Question 19

How does Kant describe the prudent shopkeeper?

A) He does not do his duty.
B) He acts in accordance with duty but not necessarily from duty.
C) He acts from duty.
D) He goes beyond the call of duty.

Question 20

What is a maxim in Kant's terminology?

A) A wise saying that gives good advice about how to act morally
B) A principle upon which one bases one's action
C) A false moral principle
D) A true moral principle

Question 21

What does Kant think is the fundamental principle of morality?

A) Act so as to bring about the greatest possible amount of happiness.
B) Act only on maxims that you can at the same time will to be universal laws.
C) Always treat humans as ends in themselves, never merely as means.
D) Both b and c

Question 22

Which does Kant think has more moral worth: grudgingly giving money to charity because it is the right thing to do or happily giving money to charity because it makes you happy to help others?

A) Grudgingly giving money
B) Happily giving money
C) They are both morally worthy and to an equal degree.
D) Neither has any moral worth.

Question 23

What does Kant claim is the only thing that is "good without limitation?" What arguments does Kant give for this view? Do you find his arguments compelling? Why or why not?

Question 24

What does it mean to call something a categorical imperative? How do categorical imperatives differ from hypothetical imperatives? Which does Kant think are essential to morality? Do you agree with him about this? Why or why not?

Question 25

What does Kant mean by "acting from duty," and how does it differ from acting merely in accordance with duty? Do you agree with Kant that actions have moral worth only if done from duty? Why or why not?

Question 26

Case Study
Imagine that Jesse has promised a friend that he will pick her up from the airport when she arrives in town. Her flight is arriving soon, and Jesse is getting ready to leave to pick her up when he suddenly gets a phone call about an exciting job opportunity. Jesse has been looking for a new job for some time and this one would be particularly good for him in a variety of ways. However, there's a catch-the job needs to be filled right away, so if he cannot come in right now and interview for it, it will go to someone else. Jesse knows it is strongly in his interest for him to go to the interview but also that doing so would mean breaking a promise. He also knows that whether he keeps his promise makes a relatively minor difference in his friend's life compared to the difference in his life is he gets the job.
-What would Kant say Jesse should do in such a case and why? Do you agree with this answer? Why or why not?

Question 27

Case Study
Imagine that Jesse has promised a friend that he will pick her up from the airport when she arrives in town. Her flight is arriving soon, and Jesse is getting ready to leave to pick her up when he suddenly gets a phone call about an exciting job opportunity. Jesse has been looking for a new job for some time and this one would be particularly good for him in a variety of ways. However, there's a catch-the job needs to be filled right away, so if he cannot come in right now and interview for it, it will go to someone else. Jesse knows it is strongly in his interest for him to go to the interview but also that doing so would mean breaking a promise. He also knows that whether he keeps his promise makes a relatively minor difference in his friend's life compared to the difference in his life is he gets the job.
-Is this a case of conflict between moral duty and self-interest? Do you think Kant was right that moral duty always overrides other demands? Why or why not?