discussion 1

User Generated

qnanwhnu1210

Humanities

PHI 208 Ethics and Moral Reasoning

ashfor

Description

Week 3 Discussion #1: Applying the Categorical Imperative

To ensure that your initial post starts its own unique thread, do not reply to this post. Instead, please click the "Reply" link above this post.

Please read the general discussion requirements above, as well as the announcements explaining the discussion requirements and answering the most frequently asked questions. If you are still unsure about how to proceed with the discussion, please reply to one of those announcements or contact your instructor.

Please carefully read and think about the entire prompt before composing your first post. This discussion will require you to have carefully read Chapter 4 of the textbook, as well as the assigned portions of Immanuel Kant’s (2008) Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.

Kant’s text and the textbook discuss two “formulations” or ways of expressing Kant’s Categorical Imperative, the “Formula of Universal Law” and the “Formula of Humanity.” For each formula, Kant considers four test cases to explain how it applies: Suicide, False Promises, Cultivating One’s Talents, and Beneficence.

  1. Engage with the text:

Choose one of these test cases (it can be from either formula), and explain in your own words the reasoning that leads to the conclusion Kant defends. You should first explain the Categorical Imperative itself, focusing on the particular formula you are considering, and then carefully show how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.

  1. Reflect on the theories:

Would a utilitarian come to a different conclusion? If so, explain why. If a utilitarian would come to the same conclusion in this case, could there be a variation in the case that would lead the utilitarian and Kant to come to different conclusions?

  1. Reflect on yourself:

Do you agree with Kant’s conclusion? If not, explain the flaws in his reasoning. If you do agree, and you think a utilitarian would come to a different conclusion in this or a slightly varied case, why do you think that Kant’s reasoning is superior to the utilitarian’s? (You may want to consult section 4.3, “Challenges to Kant’s Theory” for help with this section).

  1. Discuss with your peers:

Consider whether your peers have provided different analyses and/or responses than you did (or would, if it’s a different topic). If it is, raise some questions about their view that could lead to good discussion about your differences. If your responses were similar, think about a problem or worry that could be raised about your views, and discuss with your peer how to address it.

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hello buddy, here are the answers. I think the last part should be done later after checking on the peers responses. In case of any question let me know and we work on it together. Thanks for patience and trust.
Attached.

Running head: APPLYING THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

Applying the Categorical Imperative
Student’s Name
University Affiliation
Date

1

APPLYING THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

2

According to the Kantian ethics, the categorical imperative is a flat moral obligation or
responsibility which ties in all considerations, but it does not depend on a person's purpose or
inclination. Categorical imperative can also be referred to as a supreme principle of morals in
which a human must act objectively without considering the outcome's final result (Kant, 2008).
One of the methods of expressing this responsibili...


Anonymous
This is great! Exactly what I wanted.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags