If you weren't here last time, there's a bunch of handouts--come up and get one.

Reading for next time:
No Reading assigned between this date and the Exam on Tuesday, November 20, 2001
The next reading assignment was for Tuesday, November 27, 2001 and consisted of pages 341-374 of Rosenstand.

Deontology:
Shopkeeper has three motives for honesty:
1) NATURAL INCLINATION: He's a nice guy and would feel bad if he cheated people.
2) INDIRECT INCLINATION: He wants to keep his customers and avoid legal trouble.
3) FROM DUTY: "It's wrong to cheat people, therefore I will never cheat a customer."

Only the third motive is morally praise-worthy. The other motives are not morally praiseworthy as they could be seen as selfish.

what sort of desires you have -- character

you should concentrate on the type of person you want to create

When acting from duty, this is from pure reason, and desire doesn't event enter into it

Regardless of what you want or what will benefit you, do your duty

KANT says:
Desire and duty are polar opposites

Utilitarians like Mill argue against Kant

Categorical imperatives:
do regardless of desire/lack of desire

So, morality....

Possible test question:
(didn't get question on paper)
A) Categorical
B) Hypothetical
C) Both
D) Some flunky answer
E) None of the Above

Kant gives a little information about morality

Two formulations of the moral law
1) Universal law formulation

Universal Law Test
Formulate the maxim (principle) of which your act is an instance:
Example: the lying promise
Lying to Joe in order to get $15000 to pay off a gambling debt

Making a lying (false) promise (in order to get out of trouble)

Try to imagine a world where everyone acted this way. In such a world, no one would ever make a promise
In a world where no promises were kept, promise-making would cease to have any meaning

The maxim "destroys itself" can't imagine such a world.

If everyone did it, would you still be able to do it?

Some people are pathological liars, others do it on paper

immoral acts are irrational

contradiction in concept

Could you imagine a world where everyone murders? or steals? or commits suicide? CAN'T

If you can imagine a world like that, the whole concept of a promise would become a joke.

if everyone stole all the time, the concept of personal property would disappear


Kant's three kinds of actions:
1) Forbidden - Wrong - can't do
2) Permitted - Morally ok - could do
3) Required - Must do - have to do - DUTY

how much of the real world do you have to allow into

(I can't write fast enough to take down the instructor's ramblings accurately.)

Humanity formulation:
Act so as to treat humanity always as an end, never merely as a means to an end.
(Don't treat people like things.)

Tyrannical boss-
He thinks you're a cog in his machine--will ride you to achieve his ends (how can I get maximum effort from this employee without making them quit)

Kant thinks prostitution (use of another for one's own gratification) is immoral

Kant would see a man using a prostitute for his own gratification and a prostitute using a man as a source of quick cash as doubly wrong

(Some rambling comment about
Melrose Place (?))

Criticisms of Kant
Can reason alone motivate action?
To move toward a goal you have to
have a desire...