Kant believes that the only thing that is universally good is the good will. It is also the reason, reason exist. He also believes for an action to be moral it must follow the "Categorical Imperative". This simply states If one is going to do a moral action it must be able to act as an universal law, not use people merely as a means, and follow suit with a completely moral world. Do you agree that all moral actions follow that pattern? Let's say every year during Christmas time you took several bags of clothes, canned food, blankets, and other goods to a group of homeless people. This has just become apart of your holiday tradition. Is it still morally right?
Kant believes an action is morally good because it was your duty, not for self interest, or because you felt you were inclined to do so. Is it still a moral action? Now, let's say the homeless people took all of the thing you gave them and sold them for drug and alcohol money. Was your action still moral? Kant believes moral actions are not based upon the consequences, but upon the intentions of your action. Keeping all of that in mind, what is the Verdict? Was the original action moral or immoral?
In my opinion the deed is still intentionally morally right because I would be doing something moral and helpful but after while it would feel like something I would be obligated to do, as the years pass. If it were this way then no it wouldn't be morally right because then I would just being doing it because I HAVE to do it not because I WANT to, how ever my initial act was intended for good and without self-interest, so there for it was moral...until it started to feel like an obligation in order to maintain my good standing/image with myself or people around me.
ReplyDeleteYes, you are following your sense of duty to help the poor even though it has become a tradition. Of course your action was still moral if the homeless people used your charity to buy alcohol and drugs because it is not in your power what people do with your gift. It is your duty to give the gift then let the receiver make his or her own decision about what they do with it. The verdict is that helping homeless people is moral.
ReplyDeleteYes your original action is moral because it was attended for the good. You completed your duty and it was not done for the sake of yourself. Since it was orignally meant for the good the outcome does not change this.
ReplyDeleteYes your actions were moral, if the people you bestowed the good deed upon take advantage of that deed and misuse it, it does not make yours immoral. It makes their actions immoral.
ReplyDelete