1KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY Introduction: Kant’s explanation of good will is present in the first section of his book ‘Groundwork of Metaphysics of Moral”. In this first section of the book, the argument that Immanuel Kant provides is that there are two distinct features of moral goodness, from the conception of goodness. He then further moves on to describe the formula of the universal law. Contrary to this argument, Epictetus and Hobbes presents two alternate explanations of will and ethics. The following essay deals with the explanation of how Kant used the good will to argue for the human moral responsibility and also presents the thesis statement that Epictetus’s concept of detachment of free will is logically more convincing than that of Kant’s. Discussion: AccordingtoImmanuelKant,theconceptofgoodwillbeginswiththehuman personality. As per his definition of good will, he says that the notion of good will si associated with the idea of a good person or the idea of his good heart. The fundamental argument that he proposes in his book is that a person has a good will only is he possesses a will which is determined by moral law. If the human will performs decisions on the basis of morality, only then human will is considered to be good will (Kant, 2017). The person should be performing tasks and taking decisions morally and whose behavior is guided by the moral considerations. Kant also says that a person with this sort of character is always valued. He says that if a person uses his moral worth in certain circumstances, only because he had been committed to his moral considerations, he would be a better person. Moreover according to him, a strong maintenance and the commitment to the moral principles is worth taking a notice (Velkley, 2014). In the
2KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY philosopher’s terms, good will should be possessed by every person , irrespective of certain circumstances or moral demands. This according to him is the moral law. Human beings inevitably feel this Law as a constraint on their natural desires, which is why such Laws, as applied to human beings, are imperatives and duties. He also explains that the duty of an individual motivates the moral law of a person which is often considered to be a restriction againstthehumandesires(Aune,2014).Thehumandesiresarepresentinaperson independently wand have the ability to operate without the demands of the moral will. However this makes the goodness in the human beings a mere constraint. He also puts forward his argument that the expression of good will is not possible with the dutiful actions of the motives of self interest, or sympathy and happiness. According to the argument that the proposed, he also said that the morality of the human beings depend upon their management of their desires and will. He said that the human beings should control their free will and transform them into good will which should be filled with the moral decisions. This morality should be used in order to modify the natural s well as the social world (Willaschek, 2017). In comparison to this, there has been the argument of Epictetus, who had been a Stoic Philosopher and who presented his argument on will and ethic. He has always been a believer of living life with ethical means and with utmost honor in the social platform. He argued that despite of the personal conditions, and despite the personal desires, the people does have the ability to live with utmost pride and with discipline (Altman, 2014). He argued with Kant on the fact that people should not spend their time in focusing on the aspects of human desire that they cannot control. Rather , the individuals should be concentrating on the aspects that they have the ability to change and control because the negative things in the life are never helpful. He was chiefly concerned with individual freedom and with self management. He did have his influence
3KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY on the moral tradition but he had been someone more than a moralizer. He provided a whole new definition to Moral agency (Dryde & Stil, 2018). He says that the moral agency or the morality is the internal state of an individual. He associates the concept of free will as a different form of Freedom with the moral agent. He also preached that the philosophy is the way of life and it is beyond the theoretical aspects or discipline (Stojanovic, 2014). As Kant explained that the human desire should be inherent of the moral philosophies and that the deeds should include the moral worth, Epictetus taught the entire world that the human desires are beyond pour control. He said that all the external events cannot be controlled by individuals and a person should be accepting the occurrences dispassionately without any external thought sand considerations.He also said that the human beings have the ability to move beyond their will and detach their desires from the world. This the termed as good will. He asked the people to concentrate upon this and their impersonal forces and base their morality or ethics upon them (Stephens, 2014). Conclusion: Thus from the above discussion it can be concluded that the theory of Epictetus is the most logical one as compared to Kant because he said that the human desires are something which are beyond the control of the individuals. It is logical and very realistic because in life there are several external events and factors which are not in the control of humanity and if people tries to conclude them, there would be an ambience of negativity that would persist. Freedom of will is something different to that of good will and morality. The philosophy of Epictetus is also the most convincing because he asks the people to focus on the positive things of the life and concentrate upon those, than controlling the aspects which are uncontrollable.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
4KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY References: Altman, M. C. (2014).Kant and applied ethics: The uses and limits of Kant's practical philosophy. John Wiley & Sons. Aune, B. (2014).Kant's theory of morals. Princeton University Press. Dryden,W.,&Still,A.(2018).Thehistoricalandphilosophicalcontextofrational psychotherapy: The legacy of Epictetus. Routledge. Kant, I. (2017).Kant: The metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press. Stephens,W.O.(2014).EpictetusonBeastlyVicesandAnimalVirtues.Epictetus:His Continuing Influence and Contemporary Relevance (Rochester NY), 207-239. Stojanovic, P. (2014). Epictetus and Moral Apprehensive Impressions in Stoicism. Velkley, R. L. (2014).Freedom and the End of Reason: On the Moral Foundation of Kant's Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press. Willaschek, M. (2017). Why the Doctrine of Right does not belong in the Metaphysics of Morals: On some Basic Distinctions in Kant’s Moral Philosophy. InImmanuel Kant(pp. 49-71). Routledge.