Kant, the moralist and universalist

We live in a time troubled by intense moral issues concerning child abuse, rape, murder, looting, arson, theft, terrorism, drug abuse and what not. In addition, bribery and corruption stare in our face at every corner. A philosophically inclined person might wonder whether we are coming close to the end times. Despite the great strides in science and technology, most of us pay scant respect for morals. Does it mean that we have lost respect for ourselves and others?

The word “moral” comes from the Latin moralis, meaning “custom, manner or conduct.” There are moral, amoral and immoral people. Moral conduct is what the average man considers good. In the same way immoral people do what society considers bad. Drinking, prostitution and adultery are considered immoral conduct. Then there are amoral or nonmoral people who are not concerned with morals. They make no value judgements.

For the majority of us moral dimension confronts us at home, office, classroom or even in public places such as libraries, railway stations and wherever people gather. On every such occasion we try to determine who is at fault or responsible for a particular way of behaviour. However, moral issues are really baffling. Do we have a moral right to hang a murderer? Do parents and teachers have a moral right to punish children? There can be many answers depending on how you look at them. While lawyers, psychologists, philosophers and religious leaders are trying to cleanse society of evil, they have not made much headway.

Causes

Today biopsychologists and geneticists have found that there are many physical and biochemical causes of human behaviour which is beyond anybody’s control. The million dollar question is whether we can leave human life to be governed by the laws of chemistry and physics. If we do so, no offender can be punished as he would say that he had no control over his actions. Then how do we justify moral sanctions and punishment for offenders? If a man has no moral choice, he is not different from any other animal.

Immanuel Kant’s (1724-1804) contribution to philosophy is immeasurable. As far as morality is concerned he took a different stand from his predecessors. With his rigorous religious background Kant resented the heavy emphasis on a theology of terror and piety in later life. However, he never lost his regard for righteousness and morality. He followed a rigid schedule in his life. He is reported to have missed his walk only once, when he was so absorbed in reading Rousseau’s Emile that he forgot to take it.

Although Kant is a renowned moral philosopher, most of his books are difficult to understand. When he sent his manuscript of the Critique of Pure Reason to the metaphysician Marcus Herz, the latter sent it back to him saying, “If I finish it, I am afraid I shall go mad.” On the other hand, his books were full of Latin terms and German phrases. Some of his writings disturbed rationalists, empiricists and theologians. Some clergymen called him a dog and others called their dogs Kant! However, Kant goes down history as a philosopher who altered Western thinking.

Scientific progress

At a time when scientific progress challenged the dominant philosophies of the day, Kant did not abandon philosophy to fall in line with science. He saw how science was unveiling a mechanistic world. In such a world God has no place and people paid lip service to morality. He defended moral laws by saying that man’s behaviour is more complex than that of rocks and worms.

According to Kant, we use practical reason to move beyond the phenomenal world to the moral dimension. Practical reason begins with knowledge about moral conduct. It also helps us to deal with the moral freedom. Kant uses the term practical reason to indicate that we do not act on impulses and desires alone. We also act from conscious choice. For Kant, morality is a function of reason, Moral rules of behaviour differ from other pragmatic rules which are very often codified. We have to consider moral rules having universal validity. On the other hand, moral rules cannot be discovered in actual behaviour. For instance, a barbarian might consider it is quite “moral” to consume the flesh of another man, But man is a rational animal. The capacity for reason is the source of morality. Reason imposes moral obligations.

Can man live in a world in which no one had any moral obligations? Kant said, “No.” He said morality is a sine qua non for human relationship. However, obeying God or nature out of fear or necessity is not moral. Moral law is obligatory because it springs from our own rational nature and becomes law only when we willingly assent to it. He describes the moral universe as the “Kingdom of Ends” in which everyone is an end in himself or herself. this leads to the inevitable conclusion that we are means and ends.