Immanuel Kant 1

The Critique of Pure Reason

The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals

This book is about:

What the supreme principle of morality is.

What freedom really is.

Human Dignity comes from Rational Capacity [capable of reason and act and choose freely]

Kant offers a different account of why we have a categorical duty to respect the dignity of persons and not to use people as means, even for good ends. Kant rejects utilitarianism. He thinks that the individual person, all human beings have a certain dignity that commands our respect. The reason the individual is sacred or the bearer of rights according to Kant doesn’t stem from the idea that we own ourselves, but instead from the idea that we are all rational beings, which simply means we are beings capable of reason. We are also autonomous beings which is to say that we are beings capable of acting and choosing freely. This capacity for reason and freedom isn’t the only capacity we have, we also have the capacity for pain and pleasure, for suffering and satisfaction. Kant admits the utilitarians were half right, of course we seek to avoid pain and we like pleasure, Kant doesn’t deny this, what he does deny is Bentham’s claim that pain and pleasure are our sovereign masters. Kant thinks that’s wrong, it’s our rational capacity that makes us distinctive, that sets us apart and above mere animal existence. It makes us something more than just physical creatures with appetites.

Freedom as Autonomy

We often think of freedom as simply consisting in doing what we want or in the absence of obstacles to getting what we want. This is not Kant’s idea of freedom. Kant has a more stringent, demanding notion of what it means to be free.

Kant’s reason is as follows:

When we, like animals, seek after pleasure or the satisfaction of our desires, the avoidance of pain, when we do that we are not acting freely. Why not? We’re really acting as the slaves of those appetites and impulses. I didn’t choose this particular hunger or that particular appetite, and so when I act to satisfy it, I’m just acting according to natural necessity, and for Kant, freedom is the opposite of necessity.

Then, how can my will be determined if not by the prompting sub nature or my hunger or my appetites, or my desires?

Kant’s answer:

To act freely= To act autonomously = To act according to a law I give myself (not according to the physical laws of nature).

Heteronomy 他治，他律 (a term invented by Kant to describe the opposite of autonomy)

=To act according to desires I haven’t chosen myself

Why is autonomy the opposite of acting according to the dictates of nature? Kant’s point is that nature is governed by laws, laws of cause and effect for example. If you drop a ball, it falls. We can’t say the ball is acting freely, because it’s acting according to the law of nature, according to the laws of cause and effect, the law of gravity. To act freely is not to choose the best means to a given end, it’s to choose the end itself for its own sake. And that’s something that human beings can do and balls can’t. Insofar as we act on inclination or pursue pleasure we act as means to the realization of ends given outside us. We are instruments rather than authors of the purposes we pursue, that’s the heteronomous determination of the will. On the other hand, insofar as we act autonomously according to a law we give ourselves, we do something for its own sake as an end in itself. This capacity to act freely is what gives human life its special dignity. Respecting human dignity means regarding persons not just as means, but also as ends in themselves. And this is why it’s wrong to use people for the sake of other people’s well being or happiness. This is the real reason Kant says that utilitarianism goes wrong, this is the reason it’s important to respect the dignity of persons and to uphold their rights.

John Stuart Mill said in the long run if we uphold Justice and respect the dignity of persons we will maximize human happiness. Kant answers that even if the calculus worked out that way, even if you shouldn't throw the Christians to the lions because in the long run fear will spread, the overall utility will decline, the utilitarians would be upholding Justice and rights and respect for persons for the wrong reason, for a purely contingent reason, for an instrumental reason.

#FreedomAutonomyHumanDignityRationalCapacity