Kant Evil

Immanuel Kant states that the only thing in this world that is “good without qualification” is the good will. He states the attributes of character such as intelligence, wit, and judgment are considered good but can be used for the wrong reasons. Kant also states that the attributes of good fortune such as health, power, riches, honor, that provide one happiness can also be used in the wrong way (7). In order to understand Kant’s view of moral rightness, one must understand that only a good will is unambiguously good without qualification, it is “good in itself”. To clarify, Kant states that “a good will is good not because of what it effects or

First, that having good will, lies not just in consensus with but from duty. Second, that the moral worth of an action from duty is not in the purpose to be achieved, but in the maxim in agreement to what it is decided upon. And third, that “Duty is the necessity of an action from respect for the law” (Groundwork, 401). Kant thus explains that a morally good action is one that is motivated by respect for duty. Therefore, Kant’s argument is that the fundamental principle of morality must always be consistent with the notion of duty.

In Kant’s Foundation for the Metaphysics of Morals, his first proposition states that an action has moral worth only if it is done out of duty. The second proposition is that an action has moral worth not because of its aim, but because of the maxim on which it is based. Therefore, it wouldn’t matter if the intent failed or backfired, as the principle was good. Will is between principle a priori and incentive a posteriori, and since Kant has stripped the will of its incentives, the goodness of an act must necessarily be in the principle. The third proposition, is that duty is the necessity of an action from respect for the law. Since an action in accordance from duty must be stripped of all desires, then what is left is the purely objective,

Duty for Kant is the underlying role of morality. Our duty and intentions combine to form our will, and the only one thing in the world that is good is a good will. To act according to duty means we are acting according to principals, not according to the final outcome of our actions. Principals is another important factor in this theory, our actions must be congruent with principals that can be made universal. To be universal, the maxim must apply to absolutely everyone, everywhere, and anytime. Another stipulation in Kant’s theory is that we should never treat a person solely as a means to our own ends. It is morally wrong to use someone solely to enhance our own self-interest.

We can be doing the right thing according to what we believe is morally right but at the same time it doesn’t have to be good will. For example, I could think that I’m doing the right thing of tearing down homes to better a community but that’s not actually my “duty,” so therefore it’s not a good will. On another hand

In other words, doing a duty because you personally feel that it is good, does not make it a good duty. To illustrate, let's say your brother mentions doing a little spring cleaning and is needing help cleaning out the attic. He asks if you could help him clean the attic. At this point, you either: help your brother clean the attic because he would be happy, help your brother clean the attic because you love to clean, or reluctantly help your brother clean the attic even though you have a final project due for class the following day. According to Kant, the final option would be morally correct, doing so because of good will, which later portrays inclination.

Kant’s choice of exemplification scenarios further asserts that no action that is done from inclination have any moral worth and that only the actions from duty have moral worth. According to Kant, a good or right course of action is not necessarily that which is inscribed in the society’s code of ethical reference but it is that which one undertakes since they feel it is their duty or obligation to perform it (Stratton-Lake, 322). Doing the right thing does nothave limitations or a comparison index but is rather based on one's rationale and free will. The duty to do the right thing manifests itself as an internal urge towards fulfilling a certain quest. That quest is makes one have the free will to perform or not perform a certain deed without regarding the consequences that would have on their life and society. Fossee notes that Kant’s argument is therefore shaped in a way that any conflict between duties is nullified or not considered in the analyses (3). That is made possible from Kant’s earlier classification of needs into perfect and imperfect needs. The superiority of the perfect needs means that the rationale of a person is guided to ensure that categorical imperatives take precedence and acts as a determinate factor for the morality of an action.

Kant believes that morality and duty go hand in hand. In a more logical way of explaining this, he believes that people should do good things for each other because they are acting with a good will. When people act according to principle, that is true morality, not thinking about the consequences of their actions whenever the consequences are good or bad. When people think about the action they are doing, then they fail to have a driving force of duty, in return, they fail to have a good sense of moral.

In the excerpt Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant presents a profound argument that how right an action is, is determined by intention of the principle that is being acted on. He believes that the outcome of an action is irrelevant because it is out of our control, it doesn’t matter if what we genuinely intended is accomplished. But, we can control the will behind the action. He explains, “The good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes or because of its adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of its willing, i.e. it is good of itself” (124). Kant uses an example of two shopkeepers that treat their customers in the same way, but are in fact motivated very differently. The first shopkeeper gives the correct change to the customer, but for selfish purposes. He is scared of getting caught for trying to cheat an inexperienced customer like a child. Plus, obtaining a good reputation of being an honest shopkeeper improves his business. The second shopkeeper gives honest change to the customer simply because he is an honest man, and it is morally right. Even though both shopkeepers did the

The third ethical and moral theory That Kant devised is the ‘good will’ Kant describes the good will as the desire or inclination to do your duty because it is your duty, unlike the ‘categorical imperative’ and the ‘hypothetical imperative’. According to Kant’s theory of the ‘goodwill’ if you have a good will you are a good person, if not you are not only a bad person you are not even considered to be essentially a human. In the ‘good will’ Kant believes having perseverance being courageous, intelligence etc. does not make any difference you still remain a ‘bad’ person, as you could use all of those same traits such as perseverance, intelligence and courage you may use those same traits to become a murder or abuser etc. furthermore Kant states;

The subject of good will for Kant is controversial. Kant believes that good will is not based on a reaction to the consequences, either negative or positive, merely by the intention of which the act was made. When an action is done in good will, the reasoning is not emotional (Johnson, 2008). It does not done out of sympathy or empathy for the individual, rather by a sense of duty. This is the controversial part because many believe that while good will is based on positive intentions, the act is performed through a feeling of love for the fellow man. Kant believes that good will focuses on all human beings regardless of feelings of love, friendship, bond, hatred, or lack of caring. This is why the best way to describe it is duty. However, Kant was not implying that no other motivating factor fuels good will. He was simply stating that when there is a dilemma that has the individual questioning the good will or morality of a decision that it is best to look at it from an unbiased view (Johnson, 2008). Removing emotional attachment from the situation has already proven to be helpful in making rational decisions in an otherwise difficult moment.

Kant introduces the word duty where he says one can only perform an action from duty if that action is what he directly wanted to do. He leads to the conclusion of the definition of duty after describing two cases where one might perform an action that could be mistaken as out of duty and they include actions done with some kind of benefit to the doer or where one does an action that in is in accord with duty but he doesn’t want to perform that action but another which requires him to perform that action.

First, all individuals do have a duty to what is right, whether they act accordingly or not. All citizens are held to a duty to uphold the laws, if there was no duty then laws would not exist. Morality coincides with being loyal to the laws, being a disciplined person, and living an orderly life. These essentials are all present in Kant’s perception of duty.

The good will is what we want to do unless something external prevents us from accomplishing it. It rests on good intentions, which are at the source of our every action. However, the circumstances we find ourselves into may disrupt our good intentions, and the results may not be what we had expected. On such terms, we should not be held accountable for the negative results, since our very first intention was to do good. I other words, the good will is good in itself, by virtue, and it is independent from any type of inclination.

My understanding of what it means to act of a sense of duty. Well, sense is a moral commitment of obligations and duty is a debt that one owes, which he ought to perform. Now, Kant believed that people ought to act out of sense of duty rather than desire. To act out of inclination is to do something because it makes us feel good or because we hope to gain something from it. But, act out of duty means that we all should act from respect for the moral law. According to Kant, inclinations are irrational and emotional; most of us are inclined to do many things such as stay bed rather than go to work, and making fast money. Kant also mentioned we all have many inclinations of many things; some of them are moral and some of them are immoral; but