Aryan Gambhir – A044- reviewing Adarsh bhatts Article

1. Writer transitions well between sentences but the transition between paragraphs lacks
structure due to which the development of content suffers.

2. In the first half of the assignment the writer states facts and theories but does not evaluate
those theories or back them up with his opinion. For eg- when the writer talks about reason
versus desire, he should have stated why the human mind operates with desire rather than
reason. He could have stressed on the how we dwell on involuntary behavioural measures or
how our minds are institutionalised into thinking in this manner. The writer could have
followed up by stating the consequences of working with reason and why theories favour
reason.

3. The ending where the writer states his perspective on the Kantian moral philosophy.

4. The second half of the paper where the writer talks about euthanasia and gives examples to
distinguish between moral and immoral principles stands out the most.

5. The part of the paper that still needs work is the ending where the writer states his
perspective on the Kantian moral philosophy.

6. Immanuel Kant, an 18th century East Prussian philosopher has proposed morality to be
different for every individual and how it affects the religion, caste, class, sex etc. He believed
that the moral values/theories of an individual are much higher than the religion one
believes in or the lord that they worship regardless of their caste/creed. Kant had various
theories related to morality where he would often explain that the individuals have the
moral sensibilities which was given to them by God,also help them make the right decisions.
He often linked his beliefs with either a direct connection or indirect connection to God, at
the same time he also believed that morality existed in every rational human being. Kant had
various perspectives towards morality, one being where the individual would have to think
practically rather then being emotionally attached to the situation. According to him, you
could gain the supreme power of morality only once you do not think about the various
wants, desires and start thinking rationally with reasons. Kant believed that freedom and
rationality were closely linked to one another as when an individual starts acting impulsive
rather than keeping their desires aside they can be an end- in themselves. He also believed
that morality need not always depend on the behaviour of an individual but rather on what
he decides to do with his desires along with the path he chooses for himself. Autonomy need
not include the emotional decisions taken by the individual for his wants but take guidance
of his/her actions. He further explained the term Categorical Imperatives where an individual
follows his desires by the moral law. An individual is considered to be immoral when he/she
is breaking a promise, stealing money, lying etc to their loved ones or anyone in general
even though it could be done for a reasonable reason. The formula of humanity is based on
how one individual treats another, it means that one is suppose to give the respect and love
to another just how he would expect it. An individual has the capability to make free
decisions and therefore he should not misuse it by behaving irrational to others. This also
explains us how every action has a reaction for every individual and by manipulation or lying
it would just create an end means for themselves which would indeed be a violation to the
formula of humanity. n Kant’s debate regarding the physician assisted death where the two
main moral stands autonomy and reason tend to contradict between each other. This
happens because both the approaches to morality are different where Autonomy
determines that individual are an end to themselves, Rationality states that every individual
has the right to make their decision according to their virtue/ intellect. In conclusion both
the moral stands are interconnected with each other as they have the same foundation of
morality. To conclude, an individual can never be rational enough to make the right decision
as they are an end to themselves and use themselves as mere means to disrupt humanity
rather than achieving goals.