Deontology and Kant’s Ethics on Morality

The word deontology comes from the root “deon” meaning “duty.” By definition it suggests that we are obligated to live by certain rules that dictate what is right and what is wrong. Deontologists accept these rules freely and don’t look at the consequences of specific acts but the nature of the acts themselves. In accepting these rules a deontologist tells us what we should not do rather than what we should do. Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) stated in an inaugural address at the University of Konigsberg, in East Prussia, that his goal was to restructure philosophy.

In Kant’s view ethics and morals are unconditional and should be based on reason rather than desires. Emotions are not solid and can be erratic, thus affecting our behaviors in ways that could be morally wrong. An example of this “duty-based ethics” philosophy is Kant’s Categorical Imperative. The theory behind the Categorical Imperative states that true morality should not be based on what an individual prefers or doesn’t prefer but instead on the nature of the act itself. The consequences of the way we conduct ourselves is not focused on because a person may have ill will in their actions but may end up with an outcome that is of a positive nature. On the other hand a person may be acting with the best of intentions and end up with a result that is of a negative nature. Kantian morality does not favor the actions of one person over another but takes into consideration the universe as a whole.

In place of focusing on the consequences of an action, the action itself should be viewed objectively and attempted to be made consistent so as to be morally right for each person as a whole. True morality in our deeds should encompass a standard that has the integrity to become a universal law. Kant claims that a person only has good intentions when he or she is “acting out of respect for the moral law.” Taking into consideration the Categorical Imperative in all of our actions, we have the ability to create a positive force in the world whereby everyone is submitted to the same rules no matter the consequences.

When we do things that are consistent with the ideas of the Categorical Imperative we are doing something admirable because we are following what is our “duty.” If our actions are dictated by rules of morality that are universal then we are forced to stay committed to that duty. The downside of this idea is the possibility of rebellion. People are naturally inclined to go against what they are told. If we allow our feelings and desires to dictate our actions we are then taking the chance that more people will act with a critical or destructive purpose. Some will argue that lying is sometimes of benefit because it might protect us from harm. Even though this may be true, lying according to deontology is still morally wrong. This inclination or “neglect of moral integration” in Kant’s eyes however does not decrease the moral worth of a person.

We cannot worry about what evil may be caused or even what good may have come from engaging ourselves in certain events. There is a difference between what is thought to be good and what is thought to be right; therefore we should focus our attention on our proceedings and not on what the outcome of our measures will be.

Sources

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. New York, USA: Penguin Classics, 2008.

Kant, Immanuel. The Metaphysics of Morals. New York, USA: Cambridge UP, 1996.

Kant, Immanuel. The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant’s Moral Philosophy. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, LLC, 2008.