Kant: duty and good will in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

Immanuel Kant was born in Königsberg, on 04/22/1724, in East Prussia and died in the same city, on 02/12/1804. Kantian epistemology, as well as his ethical doctrine, caused great impacts on philosophy. Kant claimed to have had a “great light” in 1769. This “great light” comprised the center of his future “Copernican revolution”, which was already presented in his 1770 Dissertation. metaphysics – conceived as knowledge of the principles of pure intellect. The innovation made by Kant occurred in the field of sensitive knowledge, seen as intuition, and also in the conception of space and time as ways in which the subject perceives things sensibly. In pre-Critical writings, Kant oscillates between rationalism and empiricism.

The revolution in the way of thinking occurred through a displacement of the center of physical research: the object ceased to be the center of research and human reason took this central place. Kant states that reason must seek in nature, according to what reason itself places in nature, what must be apprehended from nature. Thus, physics was placed on the safe path of science, according to the philosopher. However, in the field of metaphysics everything remained confused, as it remained in the pre-scientific phase. Questions such as: are there possibilities for metaphysics to constitute itself as a science? If it is impossible for metaphysics to constitute itself as a science, what is the cause of nature having given such a strong tendency to human reason for metaphysical problems? what is the path to be followed for metaphysics to constitute itself as a science are posed by the philosopher.

Before the “Copernican revolution” made by Kant, knowledge was explained through the assumption that the subject had to revolve around the object. However, many things remained unexplained and that is why Kant assumed that the object should revolve around the subject. Copernicus performed an analogous revolution by stating that – since many phenomena remained unexplained with the assumption that the earth remained fixed at the center of the universe and that all the planets revolved around it – that the earth revolved around the sun. “Kant considers that it is not the subject who, knowing, discovers the laws of the object, but rather, on the contrary, that it is the object, when it is known, which adapts to the laws of the subject who receives it cognitively” (REALE, 2005, p. .358).

And yet, “With his revolution, therefore, Kant supposed that it is not our sensible intuition that is regulated by the nature of objects, but that it is the objects that are regulated by the nature of our intuitive faculty” (REALE, 2005, p. 358 ). Thus, Kant arrives at the conclusion that objects, while they are thought, are regulated by the concepts of the intellect and are consistent with them. The philosopher states, therefore, that “of things, we only know a priori what we ourselves place in them” (KANT apud REALE, 2005, p.358).

After this brief introduction about the innovations brought by the Kantian philosophy, we will approach the work that we have as object of analysis as well as the problems proposed for the present work.

The Kantian work Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals aims to research and determine the supreme principle of morality. The first section covers the passage from common rational knowledge about morality to philosophical knowledge. Kant proposes to delimit the supreme principle of morality through analysis, so that it is exposed how this supreme principle presents itself in all human consciousness. As objectives of this brief work, we have: 1) the analysis of good will and how this notion extinguishes the existing contradiction between happiness – as considered an ultimate end – and reason – as incapable of achieving happiness; and 2) expose the Kantian argumentative course about the notion of duty and also its relationship with goodwill and with the Categorical Imperative in the work Fundamentação da Metafísica dos Costumes (1964).

In the first section, the philosopher starts, therefore, from the following thought: “It is not possible to conceive of anything in the world, or even out of the world, that without restriction can be considered good, except one thing: a good will” (KANT, 1964, p. 53). In this small excerpt, one can notice a criticism of virtue and utilitarian ethics, since goodwill, according to Kantian doctrine, is conceived as fulfillment of the requirements of moral duty motivated by duty itself, and not by a will taken as benevolent and generous – this point will be better presented throughout the text.

According to the philosopher, the faculty of judging, courage, intelligence, etc., are not absolutely good things, since their value depends on their use. The same thought applies to the notion of happiness – which is not a good in itself – and which can be the source of corruption for the man who does not have a good will. It is worth pointing out here that what makes a will good is the very nature of the will. Kant understands by goodwill “not a mere desire, but the appeal to all the means that are within our reach” (Kant, 1964, p. 54) and further states that goodwill has value in itself, is absolute and unconditioned, unlike happiness – which needs to be guided by good will.

The statute of the good will is, therefore, to guide the virtues (such as discernment, astuteness of the spirit, courage, constancy, the ability to judge) so that they are not evil. Riches, health, power can be harmful if they are not guided by the good will.

For Kant, happiness is not the basis for the moral life. The definition given by him to the term is: “Happiness is the condition of the rational being in the world, for whom, throughout life, everything happens according to his desire and will” (Crít. R. Pratica, Dialectic, Section 5 ). Happiness is an integral part of the supreme good – this is for man the synthesis of virtue and happiness.

The supreme good, however, is not achievable in the natural world, because in this world there are no guarantees of perfect proportion between morality and happiness, as there are also no guarantees that the rational being fully realizes all his desires and tendencies. Thus, happiness is impossible in the natural world, being possible only in the intelligible world. Kant points to this notion as empirically unrealizable. Thus, it becomes evident why happiness is a good, not in itself, that reason cannot reach.

In order to understand the content of good will, Kant focuses, firstly, on the concept of duty, since it contains the concept of good will. Until then, it can be said that good will is the will to act from duty. However, one cannot let go unnoticed the fact that one can act in accordance with one’s duty, but without this implying that action is given out of duty. Furthermore, it must be borne in mind that acting in accordance with duty is different from acting out of duty, as Kant emphasizes. For the action to have true moral value, it must be performed out of duty, but not merely in accordance with duty. It follows, therefore, that acting in accordance with duty under the influence of sensitivity is something pathological. Moral value depends on reason.

Kant highlights the opposition between the point of view of legality – compliance with the law – and the point of view of true morality – constituted by the purity of intention. The intention is understood by Kant as a necessary effort for it (the intention) to be realized. From this point follows the first principle of morality: the moral value of an act lies in the intention. The second principle of morality is soon expounded by Kant:

An action performed out of duty derives its moral value not from the end that it is to achieve, but from the maxim that determines it. This value therefore does not depend on the reality of the object of the action, but solely on the principle of willing, according to which the action is produced, without taking into account any of the objects of the appetitive faculty (to desire) (KANT, 1964, p. 60).

The end in view may be good, however, what matters is the rule by which man guides his action. The intended object is not what confers moral value to the act, but the reason why one wants to achieve it. Therefore, the moral value of the act lies in the intention. This intention must therefore be devoid of an intended end, that is, one must have the intention of doing what one must do. From the two principles of morality exposed above, Kant defines the notion of duty: “Duty is the need to perform an action out of respect for the law” (KANT, 1964, p.60).

Furniture is needed so that man can act. However, this motive cannot be extracted from sensibility, since no action that proceeds from the motive extracted from sensibility can be qualified as moral. The motive for action – for those who want to act out of duty – found in the Kantian doctrine is “if not the respect for the law that orders you to fulfill your duty. It is therefore only the representation of the law, in a rational being, that can determine the good will” (PASCAL, 2008, p.122).

At this point, the problem arises of knowing what the constitution of this law is – which does not consider the effect expected from its own representation and which must determine the will in order to call it good, without restrictions and in an absolute way. According to the Kantian doctrine, in any law one can consider the form – universality of the precept – and its content – ​​the intended object.

However, moral action does not derive its value from an objectified end, which means that the moral law must be considered according to form. Obedience to the law does not depend on its content. Thus, the will remains “the universal conformity of actions to a law in general that should serve as a principle; in other words, I must always behave in such a way that I can also will that my maxim becomes a universal law” (KANT, 1964, p. 62). The Kantian formalism is therefore evident: conformity with the law in general constitutes the principle of good will. Common reason always has this principle before its eyes.

Kant maintains that it is not difficult to know how to act morally, since each person can recognize, at each moment, where the duty is found, the condition of a good will when questioning himself if he wants the achieved maxim to become a universal law: “It would be satisfied if my maxim held as a universal law?” (KANT, 1964, p.63). Thus, the analysis of ordinary moral knowledge enables us to discover the supreme principle of morality.

Read the continuation here – Kant: Duty and Good Will in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

Related