1,358
11
Essay, 3 pages (600 words)

Phil 102

Categorical Imperative and Idea of ‘‘ Civilization. The Categorical Imperative describes something that one is basically anticipated to accomplish regardless of the feeling they perceive of it and without regard to the different things that other personalities surrounding them suggest. This imperative is always existent and is a morally good act, or a priori. Therefore, every person has every obligation to respect, acknowledge and recognize its finality and moral validity.
Specifically, the categorical imperative is not perceived to be good based on its consequences or repercussions that it is bound to elicit or simply due to endorsement of an action by someone else. Simply, it is assumed to be a moral good in itself. Kant, a deontologist and philosopher, asserts that there are certain things that people are entitled to do, regardless of their repercussions. For instance, he perceives that people have an obligation of always standing for the truth. It is pertinent for anyone to find their moral obligations via the use of hard logic or reasoning.
According to Kant, people begin to instill knowledge of the categorical imperative when they start to question and contemplate on the nature of ethics. Moreover, Kant asserts that acting with regard to morals is practically intricate and should not be easy especially in cases when one has a conviction to do something else. This apparently implies that acting morally may encompass people to act within a state of emotional detachment. For instance, reasons why smokers find it hard to quit smoking knowing that it is a morally wrong act, is questionable.
In his categorical imperative, Kant states that moral truth is a concept beyond human experience and it is practically intricate to depend on senses to learn its meaning. In addition to moral truths being priori, they aid people to infer what it actually means to act morally and more so, comprehend why doing something or behaving in a certain manner is a morally good thing to do and this is through use of reason. Kant explains that, reason leads for moral actions but does not follow.
Kant argues that the contemporary ethical debate starts with an assumption that a person requires free will for them to be morally accountable. Regardless of the fact that one may do good under instruction, Kant argues this to be a moral accident and not necessarily a moral act. Therefore, to qualify in acting in a truly moral manner, someone ought to choose to execute something by themselves.
However, for Sigmund Freud, we cannot ever be completely sure of our actual motives. Moreover, it is intricate to establish what our desires are, what we want. This results from our reserved emotions and additionally, our subconscious, which does not completely unravel its intentions in the conscious life. Therefore, Freud contrasts the Kantian categorical imperative with the argument that we are nonetheless, the reason for our actions and deeds. This notably disputes the Kantian idea of rational agency.
Moreover, Freud argues that the categorical imperative is not flexible as duties and responsibilities may clash. In addition, Freud asserts that Kant’s argument is overtly pragmatic and dependent on his belief in God. He also adds that cultures differ greatly in terms of their beliefs and moral goods, evil and the wrongs. Therefore, conscience is purely dependent upon needs and education among others.
Freud critiques dependence upon conscience due to much belief in God. He stipulates that moral obligations may be aimed at self preservation. Freud also stipulates that rationality is based on a person’s reasoning and thus the categorical imperative may not be the cause for our actions. It is also not succinct whether upholding or breaking the categorical imperative would be better and that moral awareness is not of divine origin.

Thank's for Your Vote!
Phil 102. Page 1
Phil 102. Page 2
Phil 102. Page 3
Phil 102. Page 4

This work, titled "Phil 102" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Essay

References

AssignBuster. (2022) 'Phil 102'. 25 July.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2022, July 25). Phil 102. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/phil-102-essay-samples/

References

AssignBuster. 2022. "Phil 102." July 25, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/phil-102-essay-samples/.

1. AssignBuster. "Phil 102." July 25, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/phil-102-essay-samples/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "Phil 102." July 25, 2022. https://assignbuster.com/phil-102-essay-samples/.

Work Cited

"Phil 102." AssignBuster, 25 July 2022, assignbuster.com/phil-102-essay-samples/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving Phil 102, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]