6. Kantian Ethical Theory

           

Imagine living in a world where someone could wake up, pick up some handheld computer device and instantly know what was going on on the other side of the world and in their city. Citizens have access to clothing that is affordable and comfortable. Taxes are low, and anyone can go to any part of the city in ten to thirty minutes by train or personal vehicle. Most people in this world live like this. The only price is that a few people overseas make poverty wages making the clothes and mining the material used in the transportation that is loved so much. These poor working people are subject to the whim of both government and non-government organizations. Due to prejudices and other issues within these nations, some minorities have been victims of genocide. According to the ethical system, Utilitarianism, particularly Act-Utilitarianism, we must promote the most pleasure for the most people. The Consequentialism ethical theory of Utilitarianism still allows for this, the suffering of the few.

Utilitarianism could allow for the suffering of the few. An act Utilitarian might be ok with a minority of people suffering. It would be difficult for someone following Kant's deontological ethics to be ok with a minority suffering because Categorical Imperatives are commands one must follow, regardless of one’s desires. We will look at two essential Formulations:

Formulation 1- The Universalizable Principle – Is waiting for political change a good Universalizing principle 

Formulation 2- The Formula of Humanity – Autonomy should be respected.

An act Utilitarian might be ok with a minority of people suffering.

Consider the above example, where one's life is more accessible because a few people overseas are suffering, working long hours, with low wages living in poor conditions. An act Utilitarian would be ok with the suffering of a minority. Are you all right with this? If not, then you might prefer Kant's moral theory.

Categorical Imperatives -commands one must follow, regardless of one’s desires.

Kant viewed morality through the lens of Categorical Imperatives – commands one must follow, regardless of one’s desires. Moral obligations are derived from pure reason. Thus it does not matter if you want to be moral. The moral law is binding on all of us regardless of religion because what is right and wrong is knowable just by using your intellect. Kant came up with several formulations for interpreting the Categorical Imperative. 

Below are two Formulations of the Categorical Imperative. Formulation 1- The Universalizable Principle and Formulation 2- The Formula of Humanity.

Formulation 1- The Universalizable Principle – Is waiting for political change a good Universalizing principle

"Act only according to that maxim (a rule or principle of action) which you can simultaneously will that it should become a universal law without contradiction." For example, do not steal because if you do steal, you are ok with others stealing from you and in general. In the overseas suffering example, would it be ok to allow a few people to suffer for the happiness of most people? Should someone suffer needlessly because I desire convenience?

Formulation 2- The Formula of Humanity – Autonomy should be respected

“Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end, and never as a means.” For example, it would be wrong to test a drug on someone without telling them that it is being tested on them. Such an act would be using the individual as a means to an end. However, when the side effects of the drug and the research goal were openly discussed with the individual, that person is being used as an end and not a means because their autonomy is being respected.

It is clear that while Utilitarianism could allow for the suffering of the few, someone following Kant’s deontological ethics would not stand for the suffering of a minority because Categorical Imperatives are commands one must follow.

It is clear that while Utilitarianism could allow for the suffering of the few, someone following Kant’s deontological ethics wouldn’t be pro-segregation because Categorical Imperatives are commands you must follow.