Kant’s Ethical Framework: Duty, Reason, and the Moral Law
Kant’s Ethics: The Practical Use of Reason
In Kantian ethics, virtue is defined by acting according to duty, adjusting our actions to the moral law. This framework is built upon two fundamental facts:
- For humans, the measure of an action’s moral value is solely its intention, i.e., the goodwill that drives it.
- People believe that goodwill is one that acts purely out of duty, regardless of any empirical contingency or the material interests of the subject, accepting the simple mandate of its existence.
The concept of duty is intrinsically linked to the problem of freedom.
Practical Principles: Maxims vs. Laws
Kant distinguishes between two types of practical principles:
- Maxims: These are subjective practical principles, valid only for individuals. A maxim determines the will of a particular subject and is only valid for them. It is an empirical moral principle, dependent on circumstances.
- Laws: These are universal practical principles, objectively valid for all possible wills.
Formal Ethics vs. Traditional Ethics
Based on the idea that duty cannot be empirical, contingent, or variable, ethics must be able to formulate an absolutely valid law. This law directs the subject with freedom and independence. Kant critiqued traditional ethics as being material and heteronomous:
- They are material because they choose a property (like happiness) and identify the means to achieve it.
- They are hypothetical (e.g., “If you want A, then do B”).
- They are heteronomous because the rules are imposed from an external source.
In contrast, Kant proposed a formal ethics, which alone can establish a universally valid law—the necessary condition for our notion of duty.
The Categorical Imperative
The moral law, which Kant calls the Categorical Imperative, is to “act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” This imperative:
- Lacks specific content.
- Is categorical, meaning its validity is unconditional.
- Is autonomous, as the will gives the law to itself.
The human being is therefore both a sovereign (who creates their moral law) and a subject (who is submitted to it).
Humanity as an End in Itself
To treat people as ends in themselves is to recognize the inherent dignity and equality of all human beings. This leads to an antinomy in ethics because the human being has two dimensions: they are free as an ethical subject (the noumenon) and simultaneously subject to the physical laws of nature (the phenomenon).
The Kingdom of Ends
The Kingdom of Ends represents the moral sphere of human relations governed by duty, in which each person must respect others and, in turn, be respected by them.
The Postulates of Practical Reason
Within the human will, two principles are at play: a good principle, which urges adherence to the moral law, and a bad principle, which is the fragility of the human will in practice. The dialectic between these moral principles marks the progress or ultimate meaning of politics. To reconcile this, Kant introduces the postulates of practical reason:
- Freedom: It is required by the existence of the moral law.
- The Immortality of the Soul: This guarantees the possibility of infinite progress toward virtue.
- The Existence of God: This serves as the ultimate guarantee that virtue and happiness will finally converge in the enjoyment of the highest good.
Knowledge, War, and Perpetual Peace
Knowledge is composed of a theoretical sphere (the domain of what is) and a practical sphere (the scope of what should be). In the practical sphere, war is condemned for using human beings merely as means to an end. To achieve perpetual peace, Kant argued for the creation of a universal government that upholds human rights for all.