Our Human Duty

Immanuel Kant is one of the most influential philosophers of history. His primary focus of philosophical thought was the intrinsic good of an action. This is to say, the amount of good that is inherent in a person’s actions regardless of anything it may be compared with. More often than not, in Kant’s theory, he determined this intrinsic goodness of people’s actions with their duties. In any given situation, a person can choose one of two ways. The wrong or the right, the intrinsically good or the intrinsically bad, the dutiful or the undutiful. His theory in respect to a person’s duty was dubbed “deontology.” 

Another premise of the Kantian philosophic school of thought is the Categorical Imperative. This imperative operates under two main concepts. 1) Humanity must be treated as an end in and of itself and not merely as a means. 2) Actions must be made as to will them into universal law. This means that in every action, other humans should be treated with the respect of a being with its own ambitions, goals, and experiences. Basically, people shouldn’t be used. It also means that the action that a person commits should be such that it would be acceptable for it to be a law placed on the whole of humanity.

I agree with Kant’s theories because of what it means for the actions of humans. His theories do not place laws on humanity like philosophical theories. His ideas are based on what the individual duties of humans are. So where killing is wrong, self-defense is not. In this case, it is a humans duty to protect themselves, so as not to be treated as a means, therefore, defending themselves is an acceptable action, regardless of the outcomes. As long as actions are made based on the duty of humans and the good for all humanity, the action is morally acceptable.