Philosophy - Ethics
posted by Chelsey on .
I'm trying to write a 2-3 paged essay about a topic that Immanuel Kant covers in his book Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. My working thesis is 'Univeral law of morality can not be based on anything other than duty.' But I don't know if I should say duty. Is he basing Moral Law and Moral Perfection on all human ends? I'm So lost!!
Duty is ok, if you define it as moral obligation, as Kant did. I am wondering how you will do it in a 2-3 page essay.
Not on all human ends, just those in which subjectivity and situations play no part.
Is moral obligation more important to Kant then the Kingdom of all ends? This is what is tripping me up. I don't know if I can find enough supporting evidence on how experience,and inclinations play no role in the forming an universal law. However, when he goes about his rant on how humans shouldn't treat other humans as just a mean to get what is desired, but to treat someone as a mean and an end, makes me think that he changes his whole perspective on what creates a "good will". I just don't know what to focus my paper on.
And I think you are the only person on the face of the Earth who has read this!
In Kant's kingdom of all ends, all members are universally obedient to fundamental, universal moral obligations. Such a place.
Then, in the kingdom of all ends, they all agree on laws and mores which met all ends, based on a universal submission to the fundamental moral obligations. Remember, this is a "thought" experiment, a vicarious state.
Inclinations play no role, as each person subjugates those desires (carnal, and worldly) to the universal moral obligations, playing the citizen role of the kingdom of all ends.
Moral obligations are more important to happiness in the kingdom of all ends.