FREEDOM AND

MORAL ACTS
 Ought and laws in ethics
• Kant divides philosophy into three parts: logic,
which applies to all thought; physics, which deals
with the way the world is; and ethics, which deals
with what we ought to do
• Ethics contains the laws of freedom, that is, the
laws governing the conduct of free beings.
• metaphysics of morals, a body of synthetic a
priori judgments concerning what we ought to
do“
• the search for and establishment of the supreme
principle of morality” is the aim of the book.
 Good
• morally good actions have a special kind of value which
evince good will
• “A good will is not good because of what it affects or
accomplishes (exp: a man who saves his endangered
enemy), not because of its fitness to attain some
proposed end, but only because its volition, that is, it is
good in itself”
• the good will is the only thing which has a value which
is completely independent of its relation to other
things, which it therefore has in all circumstances, and
which cannot be undercut by external conditions
 Duty
• “true vocation of reason must be to produce a will
that is good.”
• Nature’s creatures are purposed toward inclinations,
but human beings capacity to reason would certainly
not serve a purpose of self-preservation or
achievement of happiness, which are better served by
their natural inclinations. What guides the will in those
matters is inclination.
• The capacity to reason must serve another purpose,
namely, to produce good will, or, in Kant’s own words,
to “produce a will that is good in itself .”
 Action for the sake of duty
• An action from duty has its moral worth not in the
purpose to be attained by it but in the maxim in
accordance with which it is decided upon, and
therefore does not depend upon the realization of the
object of the action but merely upon the principle of
volition in accordance with which the action is done
without regard for any object of the faculty of desire.

• Thus, duty is necessity of action from respect for law.

 Examples
• A businessman who refrains from overcharging gullible
customers, because this gives him a good reputation.
• A person who helps others when they are in need, and,
does so for its own sake, For the sake of his duty.
• A sympathetic person has no ulterior purpose in helping;
but he just enjoys "spreading joy around him.“
• So the moral worth of an action does not lie in its purpose,
but rather in the "maxim" on which it is done, that is, the
principle on which the agent acts
• The reason his action lacks moral worth is that he chooses
to help only because he wants to: he allows himself to be
guided by his desires in the selection of his ends.
 Purpose vs. maxim
• The point is not that her purpose is "to do her
duty." Her purpose is to help, but she chooses
helping as her purpose because she thinks that is
what she is required to do: she thinks that the
needs of others make a claim on her.
• When we think that a certain maxim expresses a
requirement, or has the form of a law, that
thought itself is an incentive to perform the
action. Kant calls this incentive "respect for law."
 Autonomous vs heteronomous
• Motivations to obey a law are two kinds: Kant
calls the first sort of motivation
heteronomous, because we are bound to the
law by something outside of ourselves — God,
the state, or nature — that attaches the
sanction to the law. The second kind of
motivation is autonomous, because we bind
ourselves to the law.
 Morality and Freedom
• The moral law just is the law of an
autonomous will. Kant c: “a free will and a will
under moral laws are one and the same”

• A free person is one whose actions are not

determined by any external force, not even by
his own desires.
 Freedom of the will
• Negative meaning: A free person is one whose
actions are not determined by any external force,
not even by his own desires.
• Positive: Will is a cause of action. Cause is
determined by the Law. free will must therefore
have its own law or principle, which it gives to
itself. It must be an autonomous will. But the
moral law just is the law of an autonomous will.
Kant concludes that "a free will and a will under
moral laws are one and the same
 Imperatives
• Imperative: expresses command or obligation
• Hypothetical imperative: “If you are in
circumstance C (or want D), then do A.”
• Categorical imperative: “Do A.”
 Hypothetical Imperatives
• Hypothetical imperatives are conditional:
• If . . . do . . . . or If . . . don’t . . . .
• depend on circumstances, goals, desires
• means to end: qualified goods
 Categorical imperative
• the categorical imperative, commands simply
that our actions should have the form of
moral conduct; that is, that they should be
derivable from universal principles.
 Categorical Imperative
• “Do . . .” or “Don’t . . .”
• Independent of goals, desires, circumstances
• Applies universally
• Appropriate to unqualified goods
• There is only one unqualified good— a good
will
Categorical Imperative: Formulations

• Universal law formulations

“Always act in such a way that the maxim of your action
can be willed as a universal law of humanity.”
"Act as though the maxim of your action were by your
will to become a universal law of nature.
"All actions have maxims, such as,
-Never lie to your friends.
-Always do to others as you would have them do to
you.
-It’s never ok to cheat if you need to.
• Example: Lying
• Is it possible to universalize a maxim that
permits lying?
• What is the maxim?
• It’s ok to lie when you really need to?
• Can this consistently be willed as a universal
law?
• Kant says no, because it undermines itself,
destroying the rational expectation of trust
upon which it depends.
• Another example
• Is it possible to universalize a maxim that
encourages helping innocent people?
• What is the maxim?
• When some innocent person is in imminent
danger and we can help them without any risk
to ourselves, then we should always help.
• Can this consistently be willed as a universal
law?
• It seems like it.
Categorical Imperatives: Formulations
• Respect humanity formulation
“Act in such a way that you always treat
humanity, whether in your own person or in the
person of any other, never simply as a means,
but always at the same time as an end.” – Kant

According to Kant, each person has dignity and

profound worth, which means that we must
never exploit or use others as a means to a
good.