This essay explains Immanuel Kant's Distinction Between acts that are right and acts that are morally worthy and supports his argument on the significance of motives and role of duty in morality. I do this by first stating why we should use a priori1 reasoning when deliberating if an act is morally right. Next I state how to apply reason to moral deliberation. This is done by examining formulations of the categorical imperative and using examples of the Universalizability' test. This gives me the groundwork from which to compare acts that are right and acts that are morally worthy. I do this through Kant's Shopkeeper'2 example. Once the distinction is clear I provide an argument for why a rationally guided will should motivate our actions, and why a person who acts out of duty not in accordance to duty is morally worthy.
Before I can explain the distinction between right and morally worthy I first explain how to decide if an act is morally right. Kant was a moral absolutist.......
Join Now or Login to view the rest of this paper.
Approximate Word Count: 1453
Approximate Pages: 6 (260 words per double-spaced page) |