Overview of Immanuel Kants Grounding for the metaphysics of morals - Essay Example

Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals According to Immanuel Kant, philosophy is divided into three separate categories - physics, which is the study of the physical world; ethics, which is the study of morals; and logic, the study of logical principles. These three categories analyze both our experiences and the analysis of concepts. Then there is metaphysics, a completely different category that focuses solely on concepts as they apply to moral or physical experiences. It is often believed that moral responsibilities are only based on concepts of rationale, rather than anything pertaining to personality or culture.

Kant uses Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals to help people obtain a better grasp at what moral principles really are. Kant provides a description of some of the general principles surrounding moral duties. He states that actions can only be considered moral if they are undergone for the sole purpose of being moral and without an underlying purpose. The next principle is that the quality of an action is judged for its morality based on the motive that produced the action, as opposed to the consequence of the action.

The final principle declares that actions are only considered to be moral if they are undergone purely out of respect for the law of morality. These three principles reveal that to be considered an act of morality, everything must be done for the purpose of being moral. As there are many situations and circumstances to be taken into consideration, but cannot be due to their quantity, Kant points out that there must be a universal formula that can be applied to every situation to determine if what was undergone was done purely out of morality.

This formula is as follows: “we must be able to will that a maxim of our action should be a universal law.” While this law may be considered intuition to most people, Kant still found it important to remind people of its existence and its purpose. However, based on this rule and the aforementioned principles, it is revealed that pure moral actions do not exist, as every action undergone by every person usually has an underlying motive that they can benefit from, whether it is a physical benefit or simply a sense of pride.

Then there is reason’s fundamental moral principle, known as the categorical imperative, which shares the same formula as the moral law. The categorical imperative states that other people do not exist for our own purposes; therefore, we should not treat them as if they do. People are naturally rational beings, and as such we have what it takes to achieve our ends through our own will. However, despite being rational, we seldom see ourselves as playing that large role in the obtaining of our goals.

We are the purposes of our actions. When we use others as purposes to reach our goals, we are going against the concept that we, as individuals, are our own means to an end. After Kant laid down the principles of moral law, he stated the reason behind why we should be moral, and that reason is freedom. When we act on a desire or an impulse, we are allowing ourselves to be controlled by an outside force. By applying the previously mentioned universal law and using reason to decide for ourselves what the law means, we become free.

Similarly, if we understand that we are the means to our own end, and that we should not use others for that purpose, we stop relying on things outside of us. By relying on what we have inside of ourselves, and by acting with an attitude that is purely moral, we are able to embrace freedom.