Immanuel Kant's Moral Theory - a summary with examples

I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.

This is a lecture about version of the Kantian Categorical Imperative called "The Formula of the End in Itself." The lecture is based on a presentation of Kant's moral theory given by Onora O'Neill. The lecture concludes with a comparison between Kant's duty-based or deontological moral theory (sometimes called, simply, "Deontology"), on the one hand, and Utilitarianism, on the other.

[willieluncheonette]

" I am reminded of a great German philosopher, Immanuel Kant. He is a specimen of those people who are absolutely in the mind. He lived according to mind so totally that people used to set their watches, whenever they saw Immanuel Kant going to the university. Never — it may rain, it may rain fire, it may rain cats and dogs, it may be utterly cold, snow falling … Whatever the situation, Kant will reach the university at exactly the same time all the year round, even on holidays. Such a fixed, almost mechanical … He would go on holiday at exactly the same time, remain in the university library, which was specially kept open for him, because otherwise what would he do there the whole day? And he was a very prominent, well-known philosopher, and he would leave the university at exactly the same time every day.

One day it happened … It had rained and there was too much mud on the way — one of his shoes got stuck in the mud. He did not stop to take the shoe out because that would make him reach the university a few seconds later, and that was impossible. He left the shoe there. He just arrived with one shoe. The students could not believe it. Somebody asked, “What happened to the other shoe?”

He said, “It got stuck in the mud, so I left it there, knowing perfectly well nobody is going to steal one shoe. When I return in the evening, then I will pick it up. But I could not have been late.”

A woman proposed to him: “I want to be married to you” — a beautiful young woman. Perhaps no woman has ever received such an answer, before or after Immanuel Kant. Either you say, “Yes, ” or you say, “No. Excuse me.” Immanuel Kant said, “I will have to do a great deal of research.”

The woman asked, “About what?”

He said, “I will have to look in all the marriage manuals, all the books concerning marriage, and find out all the pros and cons — whether to marry or not to marry.”

The woman could not imagine that this kind of answer had ever been given to any woman before. Even no is acceptable, even yes, although you are getting into a misery, but it is acceptable. But this kind of indifferent attitude towards the woman — he did not say a single sweet word to her. He did not say anything about her beauty, his whole concern was his mind. He had to convince his mind whether or not marriage is logically the right thing.

It took him three years. It was really a long search. Day and night he was working on it, and he had found three hundred reasons against marriage and three hundred reasons for marriage. So the problem even after three years was the same.

One friend suggested out of compassion, “You wasted three years on this stupid research. In three years you would have experienced all these six hundred, without any research. You should have just said yes to that woman. There was no need to do so much hard work. Three years would have given you all the pros and cons — existentially, experientially.”

But Kant said, “I am in a fix. Both are equal, parallel, balanced. There is no way to choose.”

The friend suggested, “Of the pros you have forgotten one thing: that whenever there is a chance, it is better to say yes and go through the experience. That is one thing more in favor of the pros. The cons cannot give you any experience, and only experience has any validity.”

He understood, it was intellectually right. He immediately went to the woman’s house, knocked on her door. Her old father opened the door and said, “Young man, you are too late. You took too long in your research. My girl is married and has two children.” That was the last thing that was ever heard about his marriage. From then on no woman ever asked him, and he was not the kind of man to ask anybody. He remained unmarried."

[piico]

You are so good at teaching! As someone who knows nothing about philosophy, your lectures are truly captivating. You touch on complex subjects, without bringing in all the confusion I would usually get when I try to read or watch philosophical statements.

[davidfoo]

Your backwards writing is truly impressive Sir. Great lecture BTW.

[kaptainwarp]

"It is easier to do good than it is to make a maxim" -Mark Twain

[rajendramisir]

Interesting contrast between two diametrically opposed moral theories - Kant’s Deontology vs Utilitarianism. Categorical Imperative vs Pleasure minus Pain. Brilliantly presented, explained and discussed.

[Bartleby]

I love the way you teach! I especially love how quickly you speak! I have ADHD and I don't have time to get bored with what you are saying because you always have a new and fascinating point coming up!

[ProfNinja]

So I've been living by a version of the categorical imperative for the last 20 years. It's not this one, more of a mashup of the philosophers I was reading back then, but it has been a really interesting life as a result. My version is this: "if everyone behaved the same way would the world be better off or worse?"

[BardovBacchus]

The wisdom of Esmeralda Weatherwax, as told by Terry Pratchett "...sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.’
‘It’s a lot more complicated than that -’
‘No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”
.
History and literature is chock full of people, innocent people even, who sacrifice themselves to save many others, counter to the assumption the innocent man would never agree to be framed. I think 'pleasure' is the wrong word, damned Puritans gave it a bad connotation. It seems to me that most folks think of pleasure as idle and wasteful, mere decadence. I think LeBron James takes a lot of pleasure in playing basketball. We can imagine great minds deriving pleasure from thinking great thoughts. There is pleasure in satisfaction and accomplishment, having worked hard and seeing the fruits of such labor.

[TheLastCrow]

Was simply looking for paradoxes and I find this. Ended up listening to it all. That was tripped out. It's almost like the psyche can kind of understand the idea but we can't describe it because language is linited. We can draw it out, write it out with charts, understand the question. But explaining and speaking the idea is very hard to do because of our language. Like the mind has surpassed the ability to speak. I've hit those levels within math and it still baffles me when I'm doing it. Tutoring college students is interesting because you need to help them envision the subject in a unique way for each student. At the same time, I also become very good than I'd usually been. It's almost an example on its own. Unique problem, shown only one solution, find there are several when you get good enough. And there's a single answer but it can be written in different ways. Just the thought of this going on with each person is weird. Same class, different reasons for taking said class. Agh. I'm rambling. Need to give my head some rest.

[christopherbettridge]

I've actually fought my way through Kant's On the Metaphysics of Morals, and I really tried to make it all the way through A Critique of Pure Reason but I only got around 2/3rds of it finished and Jeffery Kaplan isn't lying. Or overexaggerating for whatever reason; Kant is EXTREMELY laborious and at times confusing to read in English. I wouldn't imagine the original German is less difficult when it comes to the concepts themselves. I felt I really got something from the former; the latter, I honestly cannot retain enough to feel as if I truly read it at all. So if you want to challenge yourself upon deep and very influential philosophical writings it's can certainly be worthwhile beyond being able to say "sure I've read Kant". Which is what I probably just did, on some level! It's basically all moral obligations can be reduced to a duty to God, I.m told.

[GeckoHiker]

Immanuel Kant is the forefather of ethical humanism and one of my preferred philosophical sources. I see every human interaction through the lens of what is ethical for humans. I can perform that calculus faster than Kant and am willing to make the wrong decision on my own behalf as long as I make better decisions overall. It's not hard.

For a university level philosophy class I argued over the potential killing of a home intruder to prevent harm to my family, friends, and society at large. I proved in class that my decision tree followed all the categorical imperative principles. You see, Kant's philosophy needed more thought experiments and practicality. These principles are still valid, but he died before he lived fully. It takes many fiull lifetimes lived during the normal human lifespan to truly understand the permutations that may unfold. A little bit of Maslow might have helped Kant to understand "the others".

[alaricpan]

I’ve seen a lot of Kant intro stuff, and this is probably the best one I’ve seen. A lot of them just kinda echo each other, but I actually learned new things here, granted things are repeated which is inevitable when doing an intro like this. I really liked the usage of the mere means formulation of the categorical imperative since I’ve gotten so annoyed with the universalizability formulation being used everywhere and misinterpreted by so many to just basically be the golden rule. Personally, I’ve always thought the mere means formulation is so much better just because it’s so much easier to use and understand than trying to work through using the universalizability formulation correctly.

[IndyAMDrew]

Hi, I have just come across this video. All those questions and dilemmas are very close to me. They were so relevant in my life that it came to the point that I felt guilty that I had a roof over my head and a place to sleep as so many others don't... So I should perhaps give away any little that I have and not accept any help as someone else might need it more... It's been a torture for years until one thing occurred to me: it's not wrong that I have the basics, it's wrong that anyone else doesn't... And the rest is derived from this basic premise. It's still not easy to discern but this simple realisation shed some light onto further attempts on finding the truth and justice in highly divided and seemingly unfair world order...

[mahoneg]

When I was in an ethics class in college YEARS (1983) ago. I still remember some guy who was Kant duty this, Kant duty that... Thanks for this explanation. Somehow I missed Kant in the 3 philosophy classes - Weird how these things you want to figure out stay with you... BTW - Not that my profs were bad. I would have loved to be in your class. Thanks.

[uncletiggermclaren]

Every single time my twin has promised to do something or give me something if I do something for him, or in fact ANY promise at all he has made, in our 57 years of life, that I have "accepted", I have known full well he had no intention of keeping even the SPIRIT of the promise, let alone the letter.
It took a while, maybe 20 years, for me to understand this about him, but I STILL found myself accepting, "in principle", promises from him for about another 20.
I never hung my shingle up as a philosopher, you understand.

[cliffordhodge]

Perhaps the most daunting question raised by this is: how do we determine what it is to be "involved"; for any given situation, who is involved and who not? Some people want to include very private behaviors of others by extending a sort of "no man is an island" principle, insisting, "If I am part of the same society, then I am involved and so my objection does prevent you from doing what I would not approve or consent to your doing."

[Wldgeist]

If you now take the fact that the US/UK are constructed on utilitarian principe, while most European countries have laws written based on Kant's teachings, you get difference in legal systems these countries experience. It also explains a lot of the cultural differences.

[freebird]

I had it explained thst a man has 10 ppl lined up, and says if You don't shoot one of them, he will shoot all of them.
Our class sat + yapped @ killing/ right or wrong?
I asked my 30 yr old daughter this conundrum- she said she'd take the gun and shoot the captor..
Gr 10..Sees so clear.

[anjunakrokus]

Kant, to me, feels a lot like formalized empathy. "Would you want somebody (everbody else) to do that (generalized) action to you?".
Obviously it's a bit more complicated, but essentially gets the effect of "Do unto others, what you would have them do unto you".

[climatebabes]

It is actually very educational to read original texts. People used language differently in the past. Same with Freud and others. Now the information density in texts is simply lower, which also means there are things you can't even express anymore.