Kant’s Life, Context, and Moral Philosophy
Kant’s Life in the 18th Century
Kant lived for much of the 18th century. During this period, the European elite perceived a common mindset. This mentality aimed to achieve a general revolution in minds, enlightening rulers and educating people so that they could improve the law and realize the idea of progress.
Historical Events During Kant’s Time
With respect to Kant, the most important event that happened in his time is the French Revolution. It was also at the dawn of the first Industrial Revolution, which is manifested in the Groundwork. With the Industrial Revolution came the first steps toward the introduction of capitalism.
Political Landscape of Kant’s Era
The most common form of government was absolute monarchy, which in some places took the form of enlightened despotism. Despots maintained the divine origin of their power. When Kant was born, Prussia was ruled by monarch Frederick William I, who healed the economy and strengthened its industry. Compulsory basic education was established. He increased the army to make Prussia the third European power. He was succeeded by his son Frederick II the Great, an absolute monarch who oversaw zealous performance of duty by government employees. Throughout his life, he promoted culture and education, reaching even greater heights than his father. The King was the prototype of providing enlightened welfare for the people, but without their participation. He was succeeded by his nephew William II. Due to the spread of enlightened ideas, William II introduced censorship, led the country into bankruptcy, and Prussia lost the prestige it had gained in previous reigns. The last monarch that Kant coincided with was William III. He tried to recover the economy and held various wars against France, participating in the suppression of European liberals.
Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
We have here a fragment of Chapter 1 or 2 of Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, written in 1785. The theme of the piece, and the work in general, is practical philosophy and morality. It addresses these issues of practical reason (“what should be”). It establishes a distinction between practical reason, “What should I do?”, and theoretical reason, “What can I know?”.
Kant’s View on Practical and Theoretical Reason
Kant believed there was a superiority of practical reason over theoretical reason, since we all have some knowledge of it. For example, we all know that killing is wrong. Against this background, Kant’s aim is to establish universal laws that guide our actions. These laws relate to the level of what *should be*, as they are dictated by reason *a priori*, and therefore are universal, objective, and valid for all.
Formal Ethics and the Categorical Imperative
Kant’s ethics is formal, meaning it does not tell us *what* we have to do, but *how* we have to do it. This is why Kant characterized other ethics as material and criticized them for being subjective. These laws are in terms of “being” because they come from sense experience, so they do not make laws, but maxims, which are particular. Kant defined actions on moral duty, which, according to actions and against duty, are those engaged in for goodwill. Moral action is not moral in itself, but because of respect for the law, not to seek something beyond the line of duty. The law is submitted to the will by *a priori* reason and is called the Categorical Imperative. Its definition is: “I must act according to a law that I would see become universal law.”
Hypothetical vs. Categorical Imperatives
Kant distinguishes between two kinds of imperatives: hypothetical and categorical. Although both are objective and universal, the difference is that in the hypothetical, the action is good for something, i.e., as a means to something (e.g., “Quit smoking to be healthy”), while in the categorical, the action is good in itself (i.e., “I do not lie to my parents”). Although the will knows what to do, it may not always follow the dictates of reason but is subject to inclinations, desires, etc.
In conclusion, the basis of the categorical imperative is that the law must be universalized because human beings are rational beings and have dignity and absolute value. Therefore, they should not be treated as a means but as an end in itself. Kant stated: “I must act on a law valid for all”.