Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Had An Interesting Ethical System For Reason

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) had an interesting ethical system for reasoning. It is based on a belief that the reason is the final authority for morality. In Kant's eyes reason is directly correlated with morals and ideals. Actions of any sort, he believed, must be undertaken from a sense of duty dictated by reason, and no action performed for appropriateness or solely in obedience to law or custom can be regarded as moral. A moral act is an act done for the right reasons. Kant would argue that to make a promise for the wrong reason is not moral you might as well not make the promise. You must have a duty code inside of you or it will not come through in your actions otherwise. Our reasoning ability will always allow us to know what our duty is. Kant described two types of common commands given by reason: the hypothetical imperative, which dictates a given course of action to reach a specific end; and the categorical imperative, which dictates a course of action that must be followed because of its rightness and necessity. The categorical imperative is the basis of morality and was stated by Kant in these words: Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will and general natural law. Therefore, before proceeding to act, you must decide what rule you would be following if you were to act, whether you are willing for that rule to be followed by everyone all over. If you are willing to universalize the act, it must be moral; if you are not, then the act is morally impermissible. Kant believes that moral rules have no exceptions. Therefore, it is wrong to kill in all situations, even those of self-defense. This belief comes from the Universal Law theory. Since we would never want murder to become a universal law, then it must be not moral in all situations. Kant believes killing could never be universal, therefore it is wrong in each and every situation. There are never any extenuating circumstances, such as self-defense. The act is either wrong or right, based on his universality law. For example, giving money to a beggar just to get him to leave you alone would be judged not moral by Kant because it was done for the wrong reason. With Kant's belief in mind; if the consequence of immoral behavior were dealt with in a legal structure, people would be prosecuted for EVERYTHING since there are no extenuating circumstances. Kant's categorical imperative is a tri-dynamic statement of philosophical thought:(1) So act that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle establishing universal law.(2) Act so as to treat humanity, whether in your own person in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.'(3) Act according to the maxims if a universally legislative member of a merely potential kingdom of ends. In other words, Kant argues that particular action requires conscious thought of the rule governing the action. Whether if everyone should follow that rule, and if the rule is acceptable for universal action, it should be adopted. If the rule is unacceptable, then it should be rejected. In order to understand whether or not an action follows Kant's categorical imperative, w e must prescribe those norms that we wish to be universal laws. These norms are created through value judgments based on issues of justice between persons or groups (nations, etc.) of persons. Kant's theories discuss the ethical questions that determine impartial consideration of conflicting interest in issues of justice. Kant also states that because we must believe that all things develop to their fullest capacity, then we can theorize in summary, through cognitive processes we can create communities, based on moral (ethical) action towards every person, thereby creating universal ethics throughout the community or republic. With that in mind, it appears that Kant makes statements that assume all people within like republics can achieve a level of cognition equal to one another, for without that equanimity of cognition and judgment, then the conflict issues cannot be rationalized through creation of universal law. The statement that all people can achieve a similar level of cognition

The eNotes Blog I Celebrate Myself, and Sing Myself 200 Years of WaltWhitman

I Celebrate Myself, and Sing Myself 200 Years of WaltWhitman American poet Walt Whitman (1819–1892) was born two-hundred years ago today. Alongside Emily Dickinson, Whitman is probably the most influential poet in American history. As Dickinson discovered new possibilities in concision, density, and depth of linguistic meaning, Whitman explored expansive new vistas in structure and subject matter. He composed long lines to devour every topic under the sun- and then some. His poetic project took the appropriate form of a single ever-expanding book, Leaves of Grass, which he first published in 1855 and then altered and augmented until his death nearly four decades later. Whitman is difficult to classify as a poet because he constantly resisted definitions and boundaries. Was he a poet of the personal lyric? Sometimes. A political poet? At other times, yes. A war poet? Undoubtedly. A poet of metaphysics? When the urge struck him. A sensual poet? Often. An early passage from Leaves of Grass, drawn from the annunciatory poem â€Å"Starting from Paumanok,† illustrates Whitman’s tendency to gather every sphere of human interest: Victory, union, faith, identity, time, The indissoluble compacts, riches, mystery, Eternal progress, the kosmos, and the modern reports. This then is life, Here is what has come to the surface after so many throes and convulsions. This stanza illustrates Whitman’s signature approach to both substance and style. Rather than training his lens on a single detail or image, as Dickinson would, Whitman draws a circle around, well, everything. In his world, the grand and timeless rubs shoulders with the local and immediate: â€Å"the kosmos, and the modern reports,† as he puts it. His fluid but controlled verse style expresses the character of his thoughts. Three lines of pentameter list off the subjects of life, followed by the terse, breathless dimeter of â€Å"This then is life† and finally concluded by the elongated octameter of the last line. The range of his mind resounds in the rhythmic range of his lines. Whitman’s contribution is key to understanding the last century of poetry, both in the United States and abroad. He unbuttoned the strictures of formal poetry, allowing his language to unfurl in flowing free verse. Ever since, countless poets have walked in his path, opting for free verse and the versatility it affords. Whitman also gave the United States its national epic in Leaves of Grass, whose ethos of expansiveness and inclusivity and democracy reflects the best values of the young nation. Consider this passage from the poem â€Å"Our Old Feuillage,† a dizzying geographic tour through the United States: O lands! all so dear to me- what you are, (whatever it is,) I putting it at random in these songs, become a part of that, whatever it is, Southward there, I screaming, with wings slow flapping, with the myriads of gulls wintering along the coasts of Florida, Otherways there atwixt the banks of the Arkansaw, the Rio Grande, the Nueces, the Brazos, the Tombigbee, the Red River, the Saskatchawan or the Osage, I with the spring waters laughing and skipping and running, Northward, on the sands, on some shallow bay of Paumanok, I with parties of snowy herons wading in the wet to seek worms and aquatic plants†¦ Whitman’s charm here lies in his combination of the vast and grand (â€Å"O lands!†) with the minute and matter-of-fact (â€Å"snowy herons wading in the wet†). This passage also shows the full breath of Whitman’s lines, which can reach the scale of paragraphs. Finally, these lines reveal that Whitman is fundamentally a poet of praise. His work gravitates towards all that is beautiful and awe-inspiring about the experience of life. His great power is to find the words, phrases, and lines which evoke beauty and awe in us. On that note, we’ll end with one of Whitman’s masterpieces, â€Å"When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer†: When I heard the learn’d astronomer, When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me, When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them, When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room, How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick, Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself, In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time, Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.