Kant’s Formal Ethics: Autonomy, Duty, and Universal Law
Kant’s Formal Ethics
For Kant, all ethics developed up to his time were material ethics. This is because they were primarily concerned with the consequences, the end result, and the material benefits that could be enjoyed by following a set of rules. In contrast, Kant’s ethics are formal ethics, because he is most interested in the principle that promotes compliance, ensuring that our actions are morally right.
Material ethics are based on standards that Kant considers heteronomous and hypothetical.
They are heteronomous because they do not originate spontaneously from within us; they are not freely flowing from our heart of hearts, but are given to us from the outside.
They are hypothetical because they are based on experience. Only after experiencing the consequences of fulfilling a given mandate can we decide whether it is ethical or not.
Kant warns that these standards respond to a formulation of the type: “You have to do A to get B.” Because of this, he claims that they are hypothetical standards that need a hypothesis (that the subject wants to achieve B) to be meaningful.
Faced with these material ethical standards, Kant seeks a ruling principle of our conduct that is autonomous (i.e., dictated by our own reason), a priori (i.e., not requiring empirical testing or experience to know that it is a valid principle), and possesses a universal character (i.e., makes sense in any event, not only under certain assumptions).
After undergoing a thorough self-analysis and a radical critique to become aware of the limits that must not be exceeded if he wants his statements to be as true as those of scientists, Kant identifies the top principle, which dwells within each person as if written somewhere inside us. He clearly states in the Conclusion of his Critique of Practical Reason:
“Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the more often and steadily reflection is occupied with them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me. I do not merely conjecture them and seek them as though obscured in darkness or in the transcendent region beyond my horizon; I see them before me and connect them immediately with the consciousness of my existence.”
From here, Kant argues that the principle in question, the law that ensures compliance with the morality of our actions, is this:
“Always act with good will.”
For Kant, acting with good will means acting out of duty, that is, doing things with the sole intention of enforcing the law. However, the law that we must respect is only that which we would like to be respected by everyone.
“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” This is the formula that summarizes Kant’s ethics. It is expounded upon in the second chapter of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In plain terms, it requires us to behave with others as we would like others to behave with us. If we fulfill this categorical imperative, we act with good will, and thus, our actions are morally right.
Finally, we can say that Kant offers up to five variants of his golden rule. One of them is particularly interesting, since it implies the consideration that every human being is absolutely valuable, worthy, and respectable, and is set forth as follows: