Kantian Ethics: A Deep Dive into Morality
Kantian Ethics: The human being is a theoretical user of reason, but also makes practical use of it. Humans are not only beings who know, but beings who act and use reason to guide and direct their actions. Reason becomes pure practical reason when guiding the will. Science and knowledge are meaningless if they do not contribute to more humane and authentic moral behavior. This is not the responsibility of theoretical reason, but of practical reason.
Material Ethics: Material ethics considers materials that end up being a list of standards or requirements. According to Kant, most traditional ethical theories suffer from two drawbacks: 1. They are empirical—they are ethical because they have content. They tell us what we should do or avoid. Their content comes from experience, where we see what behaviors achieve our goals. They are ethical and well-established paths to follow to achieve a goal. They are concerned with promoting certain actions depending on the reward or bonus that may be obtained. These consist of standards or requirements that indicate the correct action. Kant calls these hypothetical imperatives (they order or prohibit an action based on the goal). 2. They are heteronomous because our will is not determined by principles from reason itself, but by something external. Material ethics justifies following ethical precepts according to individual interests and depends on external reason. These two characteristics make material ethics unacceptable to Kant. A truly human ethics must be universal and independent, which are only possible from a rational ethics.
Kant rejects material ethics because it does not consider the inherent worth of a human being. The Enlightenment is primarily a demand for freedom and emancipation from reliance on any external authority. Kant, participating in this idea, believes that humankind must take charge of its life and decide for itself. This requires an autonomous ethics: ethics in which humans themselves determine the moral law. An independent ethics is incompatible with material ethics; therefore, Kant defends the need for formal ethics. Kant believes that material ethics lacks content; it does not tell us what we should do, but how we should do it. It provides a way, but does not determine how we act. Ethical imperatives are not hypothetical but categorical (they force and require compliance without conditions or exceptions). Kant’s categorical imperative is: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (also called the principle of universality). We should act according to maxims that could become truly moral norms. We should treat others as human beings with dignity, not as instruments to satisfy our desires. Act so as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end. For Kant, acting ethically means acting disinterestedly, with love and respect for duty. This means more than just acting externally according to duty; belief and respect for duty are essential.
Postulates of Reason: Human freedom, as opposed to the determinism prevalent among natural phenomena, is, according to Kant, an attribute unattainable by theoretical reason. Reason becomes powerless against theoretical issues that transcend the limits of experience. Kant recommends a coherent position on these ideas instead of agnosticism. Although we may not have scientific proof of the existence of the soul, world, and God, it is imperative to discuss morality. This compels Kant to consider the ideas of reason as transcendental postulates of practical reason. These are ideas we cannot arrive at with certainty, but whose existence we assume. The postulates of practical reason are not scientifically demonstrable, but morally necessary.
The first postulate is human freedom. Although natural phenomena are determined mechanically by the laws of nature, humans must assume freedom. This implies the ability to escape the determinism of physical laws and decide their own actions. Although unprovable, it is necessary if we talk about moral behavior.
The second postulate is the immortality of the soul. Although we cannot prove the soul’s existence, its immortality is essential because it makes morality meaningful. Correct behavior is rarely rewarded. Only if we assume the immortality of our soul—survival after physical death—can we trust that our virtue will be rewarded with a happy existence.
The third postulate is the existence of God. God is a reality we cannot experience and therefore have no knowledge of. His reality is necessary to guarantee meaning in human existence. Only God, in whom virtue and happiness are identified, can sanction those who deserve happiness.
According to Kant, if we act selflessly without expecting anything in return, we aspire to happiness. This aspiration is not always rewarded. Virtue is not always accompanied by happiness, and those who deserve it may suffer injustice. Only the immortality of the soul and the existence of God can ensure that virtue and happiness are ultimately identified.