Question

Kant asserts that we view the world through our own perception and that morality is objective and based on reason. The types of knowledge we can have is a priori, knowledge independent of experience, and a posteriori, knowledge we can only have after certain experiences. A priori knowledge can provide knowledge of the noumenal world, while a posteriori knowledge gives us knowledge of the phenomenal world. According to Kant, we can make theoretical or practical judgements. Theoretical judgements are concerned with the way things are, while practical judgements are concerned with the way things ought to be. Biased judgements result from personal desires and emotional attachments. For example, I may not believe in stealing or killing, but if my child is starving or hurt by someone, that would affect my judgement.

Kant believed there was a supreme principle of morality and referred to it as The Categorical Imperative, which tells us what to do regardless of desires and provides a way to evaluate moral action. A principle of the Categorical Imperative is the Universalizability Principle, which states that we should act only in ways that would be rational for everyone to act in given the particular situation. While it would be ideal if every member of society adhered to that principle, the world/situations are not always objective. Kant's theory leads to conflict between duties and is often simply not feasible to uphold. Kant's idea that lying is always wrong fails to take into consideration times when the truth would be hurtful or dangerous. While I can see some value in Kant's philosophy, his views are too objective and rigid for me.

What are you thoughts or opinions about this do you agree or disagree?

Answer 1

I agree with author's views. Kant's philosophy is theoretically appealing but is difficult to apply in real world settings. Our thoughts, feelings and behaviours as human beings are extremely diverse and complex. In addition, we find ourselves in situations that require varied form of responding. Keeping this in mind, morality cannot be defined in terms of rigid rules and regulations. We must consider the dynamics and intricacies of the situation as well.