# Deontology
### All the Points 1. Kantian deontology, named after Immanual Kant, is the thesis that "The good will obeys the moral law for morality's sake." 2. Kantianism is sometimes known as "duty-based" ethics or "deontology." 3. The only good thing is the good will. 4. The moral law is "the categorical imperative." 5. The categorical imperative can be formulated in several ways: 6. Many good wills together form the kingdom of ends. 7. How it works, Example: suicide 8. Why it works, we are all rational 9. Objections
### 1. "The good will obeys the moral law for morality's sake." ![Kant](http://media1.fdncms.com/stranger/imager/u/original/23848789/feat-kant-570.jpg) - Prussian (German) philosopher, Immanual Kant (1724-1804) wrote *Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals* and *Critique of Practical Reason* in 1785. - Unlike Mill, Kant argued that one should do the right thing regardless of consequences. - Example 1: If one could get a job kicking puppies, even though having money is great, it would still be wrong to kick puppies. - Example 2: Even if giving grandma a suicide pill would prevent pain and suffering and indignity, it is still wrong to kill grandma.
### 2. Kantianism is one form of "duty-based" ethics or "deontology." * Moral obligation is duty; duty is moral obligation * Greek for duty is "deon-", hence "deontology" * Duties are phrased in imperatives or commands: household duties ("Take out the trash"); social duties ("respect your elders"); and legal duties ("do not steal") * "monistic" deontology teaches that there is one ultimate moral duty * For Kant, Duty = moral law = categorical imperative * Kant was an advocate and early adopter of the Enlightenment: the radical commitment to think for oneself. His moral theory is rooted in the nature of rationality itself. * Has ancient roots in Stoicism[(Link)](http://www.loyno.edu/~folse/stoicism.html#4.%20The%20Stoic%20position%20in%20ethics%20is%20a%20deontological)
### 3. The only good thing is the good will. >"The only thing good without qualification is a good will: Take anything you wish which is generally good or valuable (such as money, intelligence, happiness), and one can always think of an example where what is generally good is bad (e.g., one uses money to buy poison, the intelligence is used by the evil genius, one's happiness leads to a sense of superiority and complacency). The one exception to this, thinks Kant, is having a good will, or an intent to do one's duty. This is always good, intrinsically, even if a person fails in accomplishing their end, or brings about bad consequences."
### 4. The moral law is "the categorical imperative." Not hypothetical or conditional command but categorical command. Not "If you want to live long, exercise daily." but simply "Do your duty." Not indicative but imperative. Not "Moral people are happy" but "Be moral."
### 5. Formulations 1. **Universal law:** Act only on the maxim you can will to become a universal law. 2. **Humanity as End:** Always treat humans as ends in themselves, never as mere means.
### 6. Many good wills together form the kingdom of ends. The ‘Kingdom of Ends’ is a systematic union of all rational beings in a community who regard each other as they properly are—ends-in-themselves with absolute value. We should not act morally only on the condition that other people do—we ought to act as if we are already in this ideal community.
### 7. How it works 1. Formulate your maxim 2. Make it universal 3. If there is no contradiction, then it is permissible. - Suppose one’s life seems miserable, and wonders whether it is permissible to kill oneself when one’s life threatens more misery than satisfaction.
### How this works: suicide - Step 1—‘Whenever my future life threatens more misery than satisfaction, I shall end it.’ - Step 2—‘Whenever anyone’s life threatens more misery than satisfaction, they shall end it.’ - Step 3—can it become a universal rational law of nature of humanity? Kant thinks not, since the principle motivating ending life is self-love. But, Kant thinks, self-love commands preserving and sustaining one’s life, and the very same principle cannot promote ending it. - This is contradictory. So, suicide does not pass step 3, and is impermissible.
### Why this works - What is the source of this absolute value? - The fact that persons, with their rationality, are autonomous, or, free. They are morally self-regulating. - Rocks, trees, and dogs, all act according to laws of nature. - People, however, are the only beings which can act according to rules or laws that they are the authors of. - Rocks, trees, and dogs can all be used for goals, but only persons have goals.
### Why this works - This is what it means to be morally self-regulating. - To be free or autonomous, according to Kant, is not to be free from all rules, but rather to obey universal rules that are of one’s own making, or at least accepted freely by one’s rational deliberation. - This fact about persons is what gives them dignity and ultimate worth, according to Kant.
### 8. Objections 1. Silly duties -- tie your left shoe string? (257) 5. Leaving out duties -- duty to help anyone 6. Self-legislation is incoherent. (Anscombe) 2. Too formal -- morality needs material context. (Hegel) 3. Contradictions -- doesn't actually solve moral problems
* Questions? * Write a short response * Read about divine command theory
# Divine Command Theory
### Divine command theory - Divine Command Theory is the view that morality in some way depends on God or the divine. - “(i) God in some sense determines what is moral; - (ii) moral obligations are derived from God’s commands, where these commands are understood as statements of the revealed divine will.”
### Divine command theory - The straightforward version of Divine Command Theory is the Judeo-Christian version where God tells his people how to live and what not to do. - That is not the only version, however. - It might be that we know how to live and what not to do even without divine commands; - It might be that god gives commands for other reasons than knowledge, such as encouragement.
### Divine command theory - Possible advantages 1. Austin: "[Kant argues] we must believe that God exists because the requirements of morality are too much for us to bear. We must believe that there is a God who will help us satisfy the demands of the moral law. With such a belief, we have the hope that we will be able to live moral lives." (Austin) 2. If the origin of the universe is a personal moral being, then the existence of objective moral truths are at home, so to speak, in the universe. By contrast, if the origin of the universe is non-moral, then the existence of such truths becomes philosophically perplexing, because it is unclear how moral properties can come into existence via non-moral origins.
### Divine command theory - Possible disadvantages 1. Egoism Problem — The motive for being moral might become merely to avoid punishment or gain bliss. 2. Euthyphro Dilemma. - Should we love one another because God commands us to do so? Or does God commands us to love one another because that is what we ought to do?
### Euthyphro dilemma We ought to love one another because God commands us to do so.

*But what if he commands something immoral? Moral truths seem to be necessary truths.*

God commands us to love one another because that is what we ought to do.

*But then moral goodness is independent of God, and he is subject to it.*

### Goodness without god What are secular/humanist alternatives? - “Fundamentalists correctly perceive that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. But they erroneously believe that God is the only possible source of such standards. - Philosophers as diverse as Plato, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, George Edward Moore, and John Rawls have demonstrated that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. - Contrary to what the fundamentalists would have us believe, then, what our society really needs is not more religion but a richer notion of the nature of morality.”[^1] [^1]: Morality Requires God ... or Does It? by Theodore Schick, Jr". Secularhumanism.org. 29 July 2005. Retrieved13 November 2011.
### Goodness without god 1. Cultural relativism — to each his own. 2. Amoralism — do what works. 3. Vitalism — whatever is beautiful and lively is good (Dorian Gray) 4. Scientific ethics — do what is objectively good for people. 5. Natural law — ethics grounded in the laws human nature.
### Goodness without god

1. Cultural relativism — to each his own. - Objection: Cannot criticize other immoral cultures.

2. Amoralism — do what works. - Objection: Counterintuitive; we know we should not do what works if it’s wrong.

3. Vitalism — do whatever is beautiful and lively and exciting (Dorian Gray) - Objection: Simply immoral.

4. Scientific ethics — do what is objectively good for people. - Objection: How to resolve disagreements about the nature of science? - Objection: “Flourishing” — what is it? Humility or pride?

### Natural law, a compromise 7. Natural law — ethics grounded in the laws human nature. - Objection: Identify basic goods: life, friendship, knowledge, freedom. - Objection: Identify basic moral duties and prohibitions: do good, avoid evil, harm no one. - Negotiate less basic goods: how much freedom? Etc. -
* Questions? * No class Friday * Pick groups!