How much should the consequences of an action bear

How much should the consequences of an action bear on our deciding what is the right thing to do?

The primary theme of the paper is How much should the consequences of an action bear on our deciding what is the right thing to do? in which you are required to emphasize its aspects in detail. The cost of the paper starts from $99 and it has been purchased and rated 4.9 points on the scale of 5 points by the students. To gain deeper insights into the paper and achieve fresh information, kindly contact our support.

Kant and Motives

INSTRUCTIONS:

Immanuel Kant, Selections from "Groundwork for a Metaphysics of Morals" Trans. Thomas Kingsmill Abbott

FIRST SECTION: TRANSITION FROM THE COMMON RATIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF MORALITY TO THE PHILOSOPHICAL

Kant claims that in order for an action to have moral worth it must be done from the motive of duty. Explain this claim, as well as his argument for it. Do you agree? Be sure to explain why or why not. Please use the 1 reference I attached, please make sure to CITE your work, PLEASE follow instructions that I will attach. PLEASE HAVE A CLEAR AND PRECISE THESIS and please don`t forget to cite with quotations, thanks.

 

1)    How much should the consequences of an action bear on our deciding what is the right thing to do? Explain at least one objection to consequentialist moral reasoning (from Williams, Kant, or Ross). Is this objection persuasive? Be sure to explain why or why not.

2)    Explain Kant`s critique of Hume`s conception of practical reason. Why does Kant think that morality requires that reason determine our actions? Whose view do you find most persuasive? Be sure to explain why or why not.

3)    Kant claims that in order for an action to have moral worth it must be done from the motive of duty. Explain this claim, as well as his argument for it. Do you agree? Be sure to explain why or why not.

CONTENT:
Kant and MotivesName:InstitutionKant and MotivesKant holds that, for some actions to be considered morally good, it has to pass some form of qualification, which in this case is to be done from the motive of duty. “There exist talents of the mind such as courage, intelligence and even wit, which are good in their own way (Kant, n.d)”. However, if the will or rather the motive of duty does not utilize them, then they are all useless and potentially damaging. This is especially possible if we consider a person who has all this attributes, but lacks the right will, then they can decide to use them to their own advantage, which may be damaging to others. This paper critically examines Kant’s claim and argument, and provides a stand point for disagreeing with the subject. To elaborate on this, take an example of a person being in possession of gifts of fortune such as power and riches. “If there is no goodwill to check the influence of all this wealth on the mind, then in the end, the happiness or moral worth that is expected out of it can never be attained (Kant, n.d)”. From this statement, it is clearly seen that good will and the act of moral duty encompasses everything around us. From his argument, Kant held that only the motive of duty can lead by accident to the carrying out of actions, which are aligned to the morals of duty. So it is not by mere accident that a morally good act should have a motive that produces a dutiful action. Even though the above statement holds some truth to it, I beg to differ due to the following reasons: Kant’s view that only dutiful actions out of duty have moral worthiness looks to be ba...
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions