education versus the society

1. Should education promote absolute
moral principles in society?
How can conflict between moral
principles be resolved?
Understanding the place of Kantian Ethics in
Education
1

2. Some basic Comparisons with prior
theories
Theory of Immanuel Kant is opposed to both
consequentialist /utilitarian theory and egoistic or
subjective positions.
Kant believed that ethics can be organized using a single
principle, one that is a source of our duties and
responsibilities.
Morality is not a question of numbers, our own or that of
the greatest number.
2

3. You cannot define human life by calculating consequences.
Something is not right or wrong on the basis of the
circumstances around it.
Morality is a matter of following Absolute rules.
Theory associated with divine command but has nothing to
do with God as a theory.
3

4. The basis of Kant’s theory – the good will
 Theory exclusively relies on rational argumentation.
 “Reason requires us to do certain things and refrain from doing other
things”
 Hence, theory founded in Practical Reason and not theoretical reason
 Structuring the argument:
Human beings are rational
They have theoretical knowledge enabling them perform complex
mental tasks (Maths, Logic)
They are endowed with practical reason helping them in their
quest to become “good people
Determination to do good is referred to as “the good will”
4

5. The place of imperatives in Kantian
thinking
What is an imperative?
What is a hypothetical imperative?
What is a categorical Imperative?
Doing our duty means always obeying certain absolute or
compulsory laws or commands or imperatives.
Imperatives worth of moral consideration are the Categorical
imperatives.
These are superior and as such are sources of Moral duty.
5

6. The place of reason in determining what is
ethically right
The ethically right is determined by asking: what would be
naturally right for us to do by applying reason
What would happen if we made a particular act UNIVERSAL?
What rule/maxim would we follow? Would we be willing to
allow everyone do it?
6

7. 1st Categorical Imperative (Universalisability
test)
Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will
that it should become a universal law (Act as if the maxim of
your action were to become by your will a universal law of
nature)
Consider the following in view of the principle:
Lying, murder, theft,
“permitting these would become irrational. Concepts such as
truth, property, and meaning itself would become meaningless”
7

8. 2nd Categorical Imperative
Act so as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that
of any other, always as an end in itself, never as a mere means.
(Rational beings … ought always to be esteemed also as ends, that
is, as human beings who must be capable of containing in
themselves the end of the very same action)
Follows the idea that human beings are rational/have the power of
reason, autonomous/free, have desires and inclinations and as such
are self-legislating agents.
Understanding arises from the intrinsic nature of human beings as
dignified and valuable in themselves and not by virtue of some
utilities we can derive.
8

9. 3rd Categorical Imperative
THE PRINCIPLE OF AUTONOMY
The premise of all morality is autonomy
Freedom is unique to the will of a rational being
Generates the ability to will or author an action as law.
Reason enable the movement towards the universal law
I can only will an action as law if I respect the rationality of others
Human beings only become differentiated by virtue of the good
will or bad will motivating their actions
9

10. Should education promote absolute moral
principles? A Kantian perspective
 The value of human being is above everything else. Why?
People have desires and goals and other things have value for them in
relation to their projects.
Mere things have value only as a means to the ends/purposes of human
beings. Their value is in human ends.
Human beings have intrinsic worth or dignity because they are rational
agents (capable of making decisions, setting own goals, guiding their
conduct by reason)
Kant’s moral law is the law of reason
Without rationality the moral fabric of the world would disappear
10

11. Implications on how human beings deal with
each other
Treating human beings as end-in-themselves means
respecting their rationality
People should never be manipulated or used by others to
each their ends no matter how good or noble those
purposes are.
The only way that moral goodness can exist at all in the
world is for rational creatures to understand what they
should do, acting from a sense of duty.
11

12. Problems with Kant’s the 1st formulation of his
supreme principle of morality
The idea of abstract inflexible moral rules is not an attractive one
– moral beings doing their duties even if unpleasurable is difficult
to hold. Understanding rules requires that we understand when
and under what circumstances exception are allowed.
NO indication on how conflicts between moral principles may be
resolved.
12

13. How does the categorical imperative relate to
contemporary issues such as:
Abortion
Punishment
Treatment of non-humans
Euthanasia
13