Fundacao Getulio Vargas Section 4 Kants Moral Philosophy Analysis HW

Fundacao Getulio Vargas Section 4 Kants Moral Philosophy Analysis

The files will be specific readings and the links are short videos.

I will post the recent prompt and response as well.

If it is relevant to the context of this assignment then use it, if not message me back so i can find some more information. But this should be okay.


“Kant’s Moral Philosophy”, Introduction, Sections 1, 2, 3, & 4 <

Above is some more readings about KANT.

I posted the files twice, sorry about that. It’s just two of those files that i sent.

Recent assignment on KANT

Prompt: What is the difference between categorical and hypothetical imperatives? Is it or is it not the case that the Categorical Imperative (we should only act in such and such a way, that in every such instance we could act that way) provide appropriate direction for a course of moral action? Consider specifically the response to the objection to Kant’s position of the Inquiring Murderer.

Answer: A categorical imperative is an unconditional global moral obligation. Kant describes it as the ultimate criterion for the determination of morality of any action. Through Kant’s explanation of categorical imperative, it is, therefore, widely known. Kant argues that acting according to that maxim where one can at the same time will should become a universal law. The second variation is that acting only on a principle all rational agents could act on. Additionally, Kant’s philosophy denotes various requirements that do not allow any exceptions and is both justified and needed as an end to itself, not as an alternative to another end (Kant 347).

Conversely, hypothetical imperative is a conditional moral command based on one’s motives and desires. According to Kant, hypothetical imperative theory describes the relationship between a goal and how to achieve it. In hypothetical imperative, one is expected to obey the moral command to achieve a particular goal. Hypothetical imperative, therefore, always starts with “if” to bring out the condition. The theory is not justified in itself in that if one wants to achieve M, they must do N. As categorical imperative defines differences between and invalid principles of reasoning about action, hypothetical imperative is dependent on interests of certain outcomes (Kant 3).

Categorical imperative seems to enhance false negatives in terms of what is the permitted behavior. For instance, in the case of inquiring murder, it is objected by Kant’s ethical theory (Kant 6). Kant claims that one should not lie absolutely; else at some scenarios such as when a murder inquires for one’s friend, one can protect them from being murdered. Kant’s ethical theory, therefore, objects the situation when one decides to lie to murderers while they inquire about the whereabouts of their intended victims to save their lives. There should then be no principle of distinguishing wrong and good as it tends to cause complications in particular scenarios.

That is the recent assignment that was done on KANT. Sorry i am trying to give you the most resources possible. That is all. Goodluck, and please message me with any questions needed.

As the instructor mentioned, outside sources are okay to use. Sorry for messaging so much buddy, just want you to be prepared. Thank you

1000-1500 words minimum.