Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals

1
Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals

• Philosophy 1
• Spring, 2002
• G. J. Mattey

2
Ethics

• Material philosophy has to do with specific
  objects and the laws governing them
• Physics is the science of the laws of nature
• Ethics is the science of the laws of freedom
• Ethics has an empirical part, in that its laws
  concern a human will that is affected by nature
• The moral law concerns what ought to happen but
  may not in fact happen

3
The Moral Law

• The moral law is the a priori part of ethics
• It contains nothing empirical
• It governs with absolute necessity
• It applies to all rational beings and does not
  depend on the nature of man or the circumstances
  in the world
• It must be sought in pure reason
• The moral law must guide our actions if they are
  to be good

4
Good Will

• Only a good will is good without qualification
• The virtues of the mind (e.g., intelligence) and
  of temperament (e.g., courage) can become bad if
  the will is bad
• The same holds for external goods that complete
  the ancient conception of happiness
• A good will is a necessary condition for being
  worthy of happiness
• It is good in itself, through its willing, not
  through any utility it might have

5
Reason and Happiness

• Reason is not well-suited by nature for the
  attainment of happiness
• Happiness would be better entrusted to instinct
• So if reason has a purpose, it must be something
  other than happiness
• Its true function is to produce a good will
• Good of the will is higher than happiness

6
Duty and Inclination

• We may act from duty, inclination, or selfish
  purpose
• Sometimes we do from selfish purpose what duty
  calls for, without inclination
• A prudent merchant charges a fixed price
• Sometimes we do from inclination what duty calls
  for
• Preserving ones own life
• Sometimes we act purely from duty
• Preserving ones life when one does not wish to
  live

7
Moral Worth

• Only actions performed purely from duty have
  moral worth
• Acts that overcome inclinations and selfish
  purposes and arise from duty have the highest
  moral worth
• Even promotion of happiness has moral worth only
  insofar as it is done as duty

8
Maxims

• Moral worth is not found in the end of an action,
  but in the maxim that determines it
• The maxim is the principle that moves the will to
  action
• The rational maxim of duty is to follow the law
  even if it thwarts the inclinations
• The highest moral good is the representation of
  the moral law

9
Respect for Law

• The moral law motivates us without recourse to
  inclination or effects
• The only motivating principle remaining is to act
  out of respect for law
• One should act only on those maxims one can will
  to be a universal law

10
An Example

• I am in distress, and to alleviate my situation I
  might make a promise with the intention of
  breaking it
• I might act according to the maxim, make
  dishonest promises when in trouble
• Making this maxim universal might lead to bad
  consequences for me
• The moral, rather than practical, reason for
  rejecting it is that the maxim would destroy
  itself if it were made universal

11
Moral Philosophy

• The moral law is accessible to everyone
• We do not need science or philosophy to be able
  to tell right from wrong
• Still, we need to investigate the moral law
  philosophically due to the bad influence of
  inclinations and needs (desire for happiness)
• This can corrupt the purity of the moral law

12
The Dear Self

• It is difficult to find cases of acting purely
  from duty
• Philosophers have thus claimed that our
  motivation for acting is self-love
• We cannot even tell in ourselves whether this is
  a secret motivation
• We always seem to find the dear self at the basis
  of our actions
• Whether we have ever done it or not, we ought to
  do our duty

13
Pure Practical Reason

• The moral law commands all rational beings
• It could do so only if is valid with absolute
  necessity, subject to no contingencies
• Such a law can be found only in pure practical
  reason, not in knowledge of human nature
• It cannot be derived from examples
• Even the concept of God as the highest good is
  derived from the idea of moral perfection

14
Will and Reason

• Everything that happens in nature is the result
  of laws
• Human action is based on our rational conception
  of laws (principles)
• Human will may be determined by principles
• Or it may be determined by inclination
• If determined by principles, it follows the
  command of reason, which determines what one
  ought to do

15
Imperatives

• A divine will would always obey the moral law, so
  there is nothing it ought to do
• Humans do not always obey
• All imperatives command in one of two ways
• Hypothetically one should do this to accomplish
  that end
• Categorically one should do this as objectively
  necessary in itself
• Only a categorical imperative declares what is
  good in itself

16
Hypothetical Imperatives

• The end in a hypothetical imperative might be
  good or not
• Children are trained to achieve many varied ends,
  without regard to their good
• The natural end of human action is happiness
• Skill in choosing means to the end of happiness
  is prudence

17
Prudence

• Hypothetical imperatives are possible because
  willing the ends requires willing the means (that
  in ones power) to the ends
• But how do we will the end of happiness?
• There is immense confusion over which means will
  promote it
• Wealth, knowledge, even health all can lead to
  unhappiness
• So there are only empirical counsels for
  happiness, never commands for happiness

18
Categorical Imperatives

• Categorical imperatives to not prescribe means to
  an end
• Apparent categorical imperatives may be disguised
  hypotheticals
• One may adopt a maxim against telling false
  promises so as to remain credible
• So, we need to look to pure reason, not examples,
  to see how categorical imperatives are possible
• The categorical imperative is an a priori
  synthetic principle

19
The Categorical Imperative

• The only element of a categorical imperative that
  can be determined in advance is conformity to
  universal law
• This gives the content of a single imperative
  act in such a way that the maxim of the action
  can serve as a universal law
• Or act as if your maxim were to become a
  universal law of nature through your will

20
Perfect Duties to Ourselves

• A perfect duty admits of no exception in the
  interests of inclination
• We have a perfect duty to preserve our own life,
  even if self-love would dictate ending it
• I cannot universalize the maxim of suicide
  without destroying all of life
• So one must act on the maxim of preserving ones
  own life, which can be universalized

21
Perfect Duties to Others

• We have a perfect duty to others to make honest
  promises, even when dishonesty would help us out
  of difficulty
• I cannot universalize the maxim of making false
  promises without destroying all trust
• If all trust is destroyed, my promise would not
  then serve my interests
• So one must act on the maxim that one must make
  honest promises

22
Imperfect Duties to Ourselves

• An imperfect duty is one which permits exceptions
  in the interests of inclination
• We have an imperfect duty to develop our talents
• I cannot universalize the maxim of indulging in
  pleasure
• Life would go on, but our rational abilities
  would go to waste
• So one must act on the maxim that one develop
  ones talents to the greatest extent possible

23
Imperfect Duties to Others

• We have an imperfect duty to help others
• I cannot universalize a maxim of letting others
  get along on their own
• Life would go on, with less hypocrisy, but if
  everyone behaved this way, I might find myself
  without help when in need
• So one must act on the maxim of helping others

24
The Unity of the Duties

• All duties are derived from a single principle
  that we be able to will the maxim of our action
  to be a universal law
• Acting against a perfect duty requires a maxim
  which cannot be thought of as a universal law of
  nature
• Acting against an imperfect duty requires a maxim
  which can be so thought, but which cannot be
  willed to be a universal law of nature

25
Transgression

• When we transgress our duties, we do not give up
  their claim to be universal law objectively
• Instead, we subjectively make an exception to the
  law to serve our own inclinations, in which case
  the law is only general
• There is no contradiction here, since it is
  reason that upholds objective universality and
  inclination that promotes only subjective
  generality
• So, even transgression of the categorical
  imperative acknowledges its validity

26
Justification

• Is there a categorical imperative that is binding
  on all rational beings?
• Justification cannot depend on an account of
  human nature, but must be a priori
• A principle based on human nature could not be an
  objective law valid for all rational beings
• But it is tempting to appeal to empirical motives
  and laws, given the difficulty of justifying
  objective laws a priori

27
Ends

• Ends are what determine the will to action
• There are two kinds of ends
• Objective ends, which are valid for every
  rational being, based on reason alone, and
  depending on motives
• Subjective ends, which are arbitrarily proposed
  as the effect of ones action, based on desire,
  and depending on incentives
• Subjective ends can be grounds for only
  hypothetical imperatives

28
An End in Itself

• An objective end could be a ground for a
  categorical imperative
• Rational beings (persons) are objective ends,
  ends in themselves
• It is a categorical imperative that they may not
  be arbitrarily used as means to some other ends
• Non-rational beings are not ends in themselves
  and may be used as means

29
The Examples Revisited

• Suicide is not permitted because it treats ones
  self as a means to an end (relief)
• Making false promises requires using another
  person as a means to my ends
• Neglecting to develop ones capacities is
  inconsistent with the advancement of the end of
  humanity
• Not furthering the ends of others is inconsistent
  with the fact that because they are ends in
  themselves, their ends are my ends

30
Legislation

• Insofar as everyone must be treated as an end in
  itself, we are not free to treat them as our
  subjective inclinations dictate
• The law constraining inclination is a universal
  law
• The universal law comes from the rational will
• So, a categorical imperative is to act only on a
  maxim that is consistent with a law which is
  legislated by the rational will
• When we act out of duty, we act in a way that is
  not based on any interest

31
Autonomy

• The will acts autonomously when it dictates a law
  for itself
• If it acts for some interest, then it acts
  heteronomously
• Previous attempts to discover the moral law all
  presume a heteronomous will
• For example, divine law is backed by a system of
  rewards and punishment
• As such, they were all doomed to failure

32
The Kingdom of Ends

• A kingdom is a systematic union of different
  rational beings under common laws
• The moral law requires that we treat other
  rational beings as ends in themselves
• So, it presupposes the possibility of a kingdom
  of ends
• Each rational being is a legislator in the
  kingdom
• Each rational being is subject to the laws of
  reason
• The laws of the kingdom of ends have in view the
  relation to one another as ends in themselves

33
Dignity

• Everything in the kingdom of ends has a price or
  a dignity
• A price is worth based on inclination
• A dignity is an intrinsic worth based on
  somethings being an end in itself, beyond all
  price
• Only morality and humanity have dignity, based on
  autonomy
• All the other virtues have a price of some sort
  (skill at work, wit, etc.)
• Keeping of promises, e.g., provides immediate
  favor and delight, as well as respect

34
Absolutely Good Will

• A will is absolutely good when it cannot be evil
• Its maxim cannot be in conflict with itself it
  willed to be a universal law
• The categorical imperative is the supreme law of
  an absolutely good will
• Obedience to the categorical imperative is the
  only way to avoid self-conflict
• The end of the actions of a good will must be an
  end in itself
• The good will legislates universal law

35
Happiness

• Moral principles based on the promotion of
  happiness are based on experience
• Happiness is construed as a physical or moral
  feeling
• The worst form of such a principle is that of
  ones own happiness (egoism)
• There are three problems
• Being well is not the same as doing well
• Being prudent is not the same as being morally
  virtuous
• Motives of virtue are on a par with motives of
  vice

36
Moral Feeling

• The principle that the good act is one that
  elicits happy moral feeling is superior to egoism
• It values morality for its own sake
• But appeal to it is superficial
• Due to variation in people, are not a uniform
  standard of moral appraisal
• No one persons feelings can be the basis of the
  judgments of everyones actions

37
Rational Principles of Morality

• Philosophers have tried to base morality on a
  concept of perfection
• The ontological concept is empty and presupposes
  the morality it is supposed to explain
• The theological concept of perfection is that of
  a divine will
• We have no understanding of divine properties
  except on the model of our own
• If it is not derived from our concept of
  morality, it would be based on notions such as
  domination and vengeance, which are opposed to
  morality

38
Freedom

• The will is a causality that living beings have
  insofar as they are rational
• Freedom is a property of this causality, where
  the will acts independently of alien causes
• This conception of freedom is negative
• Positive freedom is autonomy the will dictates
  a law to itself, the moral law
• So, a free will is one which is subject to moral
  law

39
Practical Reason

• Practical reason is the will of a rational being
• A will cannot be rational if it is directed by
  something other than itself, e.g., impulse
• So, a rational will can be directed only by
  itself
• So, a rational will must be considered to be free
  (in the positive sense)
• This is so even though we cannot demonstrate the
  metaphysical reality of freedom

40
Our Interest in Morality

• Why should I subject myself to the moral law?
• It is not that so doing will serve my interests
• The answer is that I would do so insofar as I am
  a rational being and am not hindered
• But I am also a sensible being and am subject to
  inclinations, so I only ought to obey the moral
  law

41
A Circle?

• We suppose that we are free of external causes so
  that we can understand how we are subject to
  moral laws
• But we think of ourselves as being subject to
  moral laws only because we suppose that we are
  free, autonomous, wills
• So it seems that freedom depends on morality and
  morality depends on freedom

42
Resolution

• When we think of ourselves as free from external
  causes, these causes are in the order of
  appearances
• When we think of the will as an autonomous cause,
  this cause is in the order of things in
  themselves
• There is a faculty in human beings which is
  distinct from all external causes reason
• Rational causality can be thought only as freedom

43
Duality

• All my actions, viewed as appearances, can be
  explained in terms of desires and inclinations
• If I were a purely intelligible being, all my
  actions would be explained by freedom
• Since I am both sensible and intelligible, the
  laws of freedom express only what I ought to do
• Even the meanest villain recognizes that he
  would conform to the moral law if he were not
  such a slave to his impulses

44
Compatibilism

• There is no contradiction between freedom of the
  will and natural necessity
• We think of the human being in different ways in
  each case
• So, natural necessity, which we know a priori
  holds, is no threat to freedom
• Inclinations and impulses are not all-controlling
• But on the other hand, we cannot explain anything
  in the natural world through freedom, which is a
  mere idea

45
The Limit of Moral Inquiry

• Moral feeling is not a criterion of morality
• Our pure interest in the moral law (membership in
  the kingdom of ends) is the basis of moral
  feeling
• Moral feeling, in turn, is what moves us to act
  in the world of appearances
• But we cannot understand how something
  intelligible explains something sensible
• We only have an idea of a reason that serves as a
  causality in and of itself
• This is the limit of all moral inquiry