Exam 2
Can morality be construed as anything other than a categorical imperative? Discuss Aristotle, Marx, Sartre, and Kant in your answer.
The society, group or individual who have established the standards, have to accept and abide by the set rules. The question of morality has been discussed for a long time. People in different sectors such as religion and philosophy, have sought to bring into light their own understanding of morality. Although there are general rules about right and wrong conduct that have become commonly acceptable, some of the principles dictated are still debated in different quarters. Human conduct, which seems acceptable in some areas, may seem unacceptable in other areas. Both modern and classic philosophers have discussed the question of morality extensively. While they have shared some common beliefs, they have expounded on others, and they have sometimes disagreed over several concepts regarding morality.
Morality is important to people and they apply it in many different ways. This is especially the case when a person is facing an ethical dilemma. In some cases, people do not usually know what to do. They therefore rely on some of the principles of morality. Morality has been a hotly contested topic regarding societal and individual concerns. Some people have struggled within themselves especially when they are contemplating a decision. Some have found it hard to be free and exercise their freedom in a particular society since the particular society considers their behavior immoral. They have sought refuge elsewhere, where they do not have to debate among themselves, on what constitutes moral and immoral behavior. Some people have been forced to conform to a particular behavior, so that they can be accepted in a group. Many conflicts and tensions have emerged from different sectors because of the differences in the definition and lack of understanding of morality. These situations prove that the study of morality is important and relevant in this day.
Aristotle’s views on morality contributed largely to the principles of ethics. After his analysis of the human soul, he posited that the human soul contains both rational and irrational elements. He concluded that the rational element is particularly human and it contains the calculative part of the soul, which enables logical reasoning and contemplation. He divided the irrational part into appetitive and vegetative. The vegetative part is the most primitive, and it is responsible for nutrition and growth. The appetitive element on the other hand is responsible for human desires and emotions such as grief and joy. Although, he placed it as an irrational element, he considered it as a rational and irrational element. This is because animals can experience desires, but it is only humans, who can control these desires.
Rationality was the basis of Aristotle’s argument concerning morality. Aristotle had a couple of views concerning morality. He argued that it is through teaching and practice, that people learn how to control their desires. He argued that there would be problems if people controlled their desires too much, and if they exercised minimal control. Morality formed part of a person’s character and not his emotions or mental abilities or senses. Aristotle was of the opinion that human beings are after the ultimate good, which he thought was happiness. He believed that this could be achieved by living a virtuous life. He claimed that a person would find happiness if he could learn how to balance between his desires and emotions, and his ability to reason. A person has to balance everything, otherwise he will have an excess of one thing or experience a deficiency in another. The concept of balance is very important, and although Aristotle’s observations were made a long time ago, they are still relevant today. Today, people live the kind of life where they can have all that they want. They do not know the problem of need and this has contributed to the fact that people cannot endure or stay without some luxuries. Failing to control ones desires has largely contributed to greed and this has increased the rate of immorality and vices in the society.
Unlike Aristotle, Marx was not so clear regarding morality. Marx did not view morality as his predecessors had done. He did not write extensively about the topic, and whatever he wrote was included in other works such as economy. Some people believed that Marx did not share the teachings of his predecessors concerning morality and he rejected its concept. His views on morality can be seen in his writings regarding communism and capitalism. Marx condemned the cruelty of capitalism. He argued that capitalism brought wealth to a few individuals, and it contributed to slavery, ignorance, misery and mental degradation, which are considered as some ethics principles.
He exemplified communism, which he perceived allowed him to do anything. Some of the ideas brought forward by Marx showed that he did not see morality as a universal requirement. He did not set any ground rules concerning what constituted morality. He however saw some qualities such as courage, human dignity and kindness as good and worth having. Marx’s views regarding morality seem contradicting at times because he never spoke distinctly about it, or use the commonly accepted language to describe it. Marx was opposed to capitalism because it did not encourage justice. It exploited and oppressed the people. Concerning justice, Marx believed that different situations were to be handled differently. He saw the need for changes in the way justice was administered and he recognized that what seems acceptable and fair at one time, may not seem so at a different time.
Marx’s observation concerning change in the way justice was administered are relevant today. The law keeps changing and this means that some of the things that were considered just a while back may not be considered as such today. This also means that moral behavior and actions are constantly changing. Although Marx’s concern and study was in the economic front, it is still relevant in other sectors. Religion, despite its consistent teachings, has changed over the years. Some of the things that are permissible in religious circles today would probably have caused an outrage several years back.
Sartre believed that people choose how they are going to do something and they can determine the outcome. He believed in the power of choice, saying that it was a way for people to exercise their freedom. Most philosophers based their teachings and thoughts on morality on religion. This was a way for them to justify what they believed. Their belief in a greater God enabled them to think of a greater good. Sartre chose to base his ideas differently. He did not believe in a greater God and he thus argued that since there was no God, then there was ultimately no one to set the standards on what was right and acceptable. He believed in the power of freedom when making choices and he argued that people could create their own morals, without having to depend on another.
Many people still base their moral behavior on a higher being. For some people, the fear of their supreme being determines what they consider moral, as they strive to live by the teachings and expectations of that being. For other people, the law determines their actions. Although they may not believe in a supreme being, they will abide by the established law. Choices are not free, since there are always some restrictions and regulations to follow. If someone has to make a “free” choice given some pre-existing conditions, then the person is not making a free choice. Making decisions without deliberating is not easy. Before a person can make a decision, he usually considers all the available options and then makes a decision based on them. He or she can decide to choose the decision that will provide the most benefit or the least risk.
Immanuel Kant’s philosophical theories on morality seem to agree with Aristotle, in that he believed that morality is not based on people’s emotions, senses, or feelings, but rather it is based on reason. He argued that moral standards are based on the categorical imperative, which was derived from standards of rationality. He believed that each person had an autonomous reason. Kant believed that morality was a universal issue. He advocated for justice and he argued that justice is a universal reason. Kant argued that moral behavior was rational. He concluded that if people found a reason justifying their engagement in a particular activity they should continue the actions. Kant was the main advocate of the categorical imperative. He proposed that people ought to act according to the maxim and if they perpetuated long enough it would be universally applicable as a law. People should make a decision, if they want it to become a universal law. Kant argues that it is important for people to have feelings, to motivate them morally.
People do not always consider the categorical imperative. They do not think of their actions as being part of a universal law before making a decision. If people did this, there would le less sin and less breaking of the law in the society. When a person sees a situation he considers unjust, he or she can be compelled to act morally and ensure that justice prevails in the particular situation. For most people, feelings are usually not far removed from their moral conduct. Some of them act morally because of how they feel about something.
Aristotle represents one of the early philosophers of morality. Most of his thoughts concerning morality are applied today. Over the years, different philosophers have expounded on his ideas and some of them have formed differing opinions. Others have chosen a different perspective and they have formed new ideas concerning morality.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]