Kant’s Universal Ethics and the Categorical Imperative
Kant’s Universal Ethics
In his critical review of reason, Immanuel Kant was not content to limit this analysis to the theoretical level; it should also cover reason’s proper function in the field of moral action. The goal, therefore, is to identify the conditions of possibility that allow us to deem an action moral.
Critique of Material Ethics
Kant proposed formal ethics based on universality as the foundation for moral action. According to Kant, all ethical systems defended up until then could be classified as “material ethics” and shared the following drawbacks:
- They are a posteriori, meaning they are based on experience, from which universal principles cannot be derived.
- They are governed by hypothetical imperatives or conditional rules: the value of these requirements depends on supporting the desire to achieve what has been proposed as the highest good.
- They are heteronomous, meaning that practical reason, responsible for determining human behavior, receives instructions from external authorities (e.g., institutions, feelings).
Kant’s Proposal: Formal Ethics
Kant proposed a solution attempting to overcome these difficulties: formal ethics without specific content. Kantian ethics, therefore, does not tell you what to do but how to act. Now, what constitutes duty for Kant?
The Role of Duty in Kantian Morality
The concept of duty serves as the criterion for judging whether an action is morally good. Kant differentiated between three types of actions:
- Actions contrary to duty: Where the individual knows their moral obligation but acts against it. Such actions are clearly unethical.
- Actions conforming to duty: Where the individual knows the moral obligation and performs it, but for reasons other than the call of duty (e.g., motivated by interest or inclination).
- Actions performed out of duty: Where the individual knows the moral obligation and performs it solely because it is their duty, without regard to personal interests or inclinations. Only these actions are considered truly moral by Kant.
Understanding the Categorical Imperative
But what is the moral obligation that must be met for our actions to be morally correct? Kant answered that it is respect for the ‘practical law‘ contained in the categorical imperative, which constitutes our duty. An imperative is a rule that encourages an individual to perform certain actions and refrain from others.
As noted, material ethics are guided by hypothetical imperatives, while Kant’s formal ethics envisages a single categorical imperative because it is absolute and unqualified. Kant offered several formulations for this imperative, but one recurs frequently in his ethical writings: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”
Universality as the Moral Law’s Foundation
The individual’s actions must be guided by principles identical to those one would want others to be guided by. Thus, the categorical imperative requires that the moral law possess universality.
The moral law does not demand specific actions but pays special attention to the intention behind the moral act. The possibility of a universal foundation for morality is supported by the Kantian conception, illustrated by the idea that all human beings share something that makes us equal: reason. The ‘pure’ exercise of this faculty allows for common agreement among all human beings.
Postulates of Practical Reason: Freedom, Immortality, God
Freedom, along with the ideas of the immortality of the soul and the existence of God, constitute what Kant called the ‘postulates of practical reason‘—unprovable assumptions (noumena). These are fundamental concepts of metaphysics that do not find their place within the theoretical dimension of reason but find their place in its corresponding practical use. Thus:
- Freedom: The requirement of the postulate of freedom is the very basis of morality.
- Immortality of the Soul: The assertion of the soul’s immortality is rooted in the human need to fully achieve the task entrusted by morality: moral perfection. Humans must reasonably aspire to achieve such perfection but are aware that this task exceeds the duration of a single life.
- Existence of God: The human being is subject to both virtue and passions. Achieving happiness through performing moral duty is only possible if there exists an omnipotent and omniscient being (God) who rewards the immortal soul for its virtue.