Immanuel Kant

Immanuel Kant set forth the moral theory of deontology or “that which is obligatory.” (p
219) The textbook describes Kantian interpretation of good will as, “having good
intentions, in terms of respecting a moral law that is rational and deserves to be a
universal law.” (p 599) His axiom was based on an agent acting in rational manner under
free will, with a moral obligation. The duty to fulfill the obligation was to be preformed
without an emphasis or perception of the end result. This was known as the categorical
imperative. (p 222) He stated this as: “Act according to a maxim which can likewise be
valid as universal law.” (p 223) Maxims that could not meet the criteria for the
categorical imperative opposed the given position of morality.
Defining rational thought due to the agent’s free will is in itself an individual and
subjective perception. Internal motivators cannot be legislated though a universal law,
regardless of intent. Kant described rational people as: “Autonomous lawmakers”. (p
225) Laws are in place to enforce duties of commitment rather than an act of
benevolence. Jurisprudence contends that “promises made and accepted must be kept”
therefore enforcing external motivations and consequences that might not fall into an
individual’s moral obligation. Provided the individual could supply an abundance of
minutiae to rationalize his necessity for failing to maintain his contractual obligations. He
may apply the categorical imperative and find that his exception is a rational deduction.
(p 228)
Kant believed that to act morally would result in dignity to all rationally thinking beings.
He believed that rational beings are irreplaceable and therefore not subject to being used
as a means to an end. Those “things” that do not “qualify” as rational are construed as
having a replacement value and as such may be replaced with a like “thing.” (p 239)
Immanuel Kant’s theory of “ends in themselves” came at a time when the thought of
individual rights and freedoms were far from universal. Human rights and dignity have
only recently been a focus of world leaders and world organizations. Currently there are
still many exceptions to these ideals. Kant’s ideas of human dignity have been
incorporated in the modern constitutions of both Germany and Austria. More and more
human rights groups are pressing for legislation to apply Kant’s theories of the dignity of
humans to the current United States prison population. Imputation in morality, should
subject any individual to the consequences of his deed. Judicial consequences would be
valid “imputatio judiciaria s. validia. This would seem to contradict Kant’s hypothesis of
universal dignity to all rational moral beings. A resistance to differences of opinions
seems to be the universal law in philosophers.