Kant's Moral Axioms

Kant
Foundation of Kant's moral philosophy and its reinterpretation.
A quintessential humanistic doctrine.

Marian Hillar

Abstract

Kant's writings on ethics are the most important since antiquity. Kant argues that our moral obligations in the final analysis derive from reason by recognition of the moral law, and not from neither God, nor from communities, nor from inclinations or desires. But being a practical realist, Kant differentiates several levels of operation of the behavioral rules. Thus Kant was able to differentiate between two modes of human operation: the categorical imperative which is recognition of the objective moral principle operating in the nature and the hypothetical imperative which makes our behavior conditioned on a variety of other factors. It was by his genius that Kant has foreseen this natural "law" recognized by reason which today is confirmed by a plethora of evolutionary, biological, neurological, ethological, and psychological studies. This article reevaluates Kant's moral theory taking into consideration achievements of modern behavioral sciences. The author discussed Kant moral philosopy in a previous publication within a broader context of the universal ethics. [i]

Introduction

Kant’s writings on ethics (Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), Critique of Practical Reason (1788), Metaphysics of Ethics (1797)) are the most important since antiquity. Kant argues, following the ancient Stoics, that our moral obligations in the final analysis derive from reason by recognition of the natural moral law, and not from either god, or communities, nor from inclinations or desires. But being a practical realist, Kant differentiates several levels of motivation and of the operation of the behavioral rules preserving human autonomy and free choice in our moral decisions. Thus his theory, just as its sources (Aristotle’s psychology and the Stoic doctrine), is deeply humanistic. He considered himself a philosopher of the Enlightenment and believed that one should submit everything to the test of criticism and that our reason is the source of its own principles.
There are many parallels in Kant’s thought with the ideas developed by the ancient Stoics (Zeno of Citium, Cleanthes, Chrysippus, Cicero, and others) and Eastern thought developed in Indian culture and in China. His thought is thus an elaboration on the themes of the ancient philosophers. Previously we have reviewed moral philosophy of the Stoic school in a series of six articles published in the Houston Freethought Alliance Newsletter (issues 101-106, 2008). In this paper we shall present the moral philosophy of Kant as a culminating point in an effort of the human mind to grasp the issue of human behavior in society. What is important for this analysis is to keep in mind that the philosophical intuitions we find in various schools in the West and in the East can be reevaluated today in a more precise way due to the progress in the natural sciences, and especially from the evolutionary perspective. This does not mean that such perspective was absent in the previous search, especially in the ancient Greek or Indian thought. The naturalistic outlook represented in the ancient schools and philosophical intuitions today is confirmed by studies of our biological nature. Yet we humans are not automata which follow the prescribed pattern of input/output operating in the mechanical, even highly adaptive systems defined by science. With the rise of sentient and rational life appeared a new quality in nature, namely, freedom. Still this freedom should be controlled by reason though we are not always motivated by moral law. Modern science provides today some insight into the mechanisms operating in human behavior at several levels which we will discuss at another occasion.

We will attempt to present Kant’s moral philosophy and emphasize its various aspects which are usually ignored by philosophers.

Full paper: Word Doc | PDF

[i] Author previously discussed Kant’s ethics in the context of the possibility of developing a universal moral code: Marian Hillar, “Is a Universal ethics Possible? A Humanist Proposition.” In The Philosophy of Humanism and the Issues of Today. American Humanist Association, Houston, 1995, pp. 127-148.

[ii] Immanuel Kant, Foundations of the Mataphysics of Morals and What is Enlightenment? Translated, with Introduction, by Lewis White beck. (New York: London: Macmillan Publishing Company, Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1988).

Onora O’Neill, “Kantian Ethics.” In A Companion to Ethics. Peter Singer, ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1997), pp. 175-185.

[iii] Robert Wright, The Moral Animal. Evolutionary Psychology of Everyday Life. (New York: Vintage Books, 1995).

Mary Midgley, “The Evolution of Ethics.” In P. Singer, op. cit., pp. 3-13.

Michael Ruse, “The Significance pof Evolution.” In P. Singer, op. cit., pp. 500-510.