Introduction
People determine the moral value of acts differently since environment and experience play a role in shaping one’s opinion of morality. The criterion for the acceptability of deeds is different for everyone, so it is difficult to choose a single view of morality and the morality of an act. According to Kant, moral value in deeds arises when they are the consequence of duty, not the inclination. Kant’s moral laws are based on the properties of deeds in the fulfillment of which an action is obligatory.
Discussion
A perception of Kant’s assertion should begin with how he proposes to measure the morality of actions. The moral value of actions arises if the agent has good intentions and expects a positive outcome. However, the outcome may be harmful, which does not deprive the act of morality. Here Kant points out that goodwill and intention arise from a sense of the necessity of doing an act because it is right and fits into the universal laws. The value of the act is expressed in pure reason, which performs the act not out of selfishness, desires, or goals (Vaughn 321). The existence of universal law is determinative and moral actions are those that obey it.
This universal moral law is an essential condition for the moral value of deeds. Doing is a duty interpreted by the laws of nature; it cannot be violated even if the agent does not believe in its justice or morality. According to Kant, to do what is proper means to find the strength to carry out the act correctly, despite one’s attitude toward it (Vaughn 340). Respect, in this case, is necessary because it recognizes the value of morality and morality itself. In this case, sacrificing one’s principles and desires can endow the act with moral value; consequently, it becomes a duty rather than a disposition.
Moral reasoning and conformity to the world’s law allow us to interpret acts as morally conditioned acts that are out of duty. Duty, in this case, is not only a duty but also an understanding of the need to do what is right (Vaughn 341). Whatever the act, its moral value will be formed if the agent recognizes this necessity and acts according to the world’s law (Vaughn 318). Kant suggests that doing what is right is a moral duty that is not always given quickly. This property brings one back to questions about reason being the primary element for evaluating action and creation. Duty is a responsibility to oneself and one’s morals with ethical principles.
Confirmation of Kant’s theory can be found in how human communication occurs. Regarding moral duty, speaking the truth and being honest in any dialogue is everyone’s responsibility. According to Kant, this is how trust is built between people and the universal laws of ethics are respected. A person is doing right and by duty if he chooses to tell the truth despite the potential negative consequences for himself or someone else. For example, in a court of law, it is impossible not to tell the truth because the principles of justice condition the law. However, some plaintiffs and defendants may lie, thereby violating moral duty and world law and overstepping the boundaries of what is right. According to Kant, such behavior has no moral value a priori, whereas persons who tell the truth, even to their detriment, are doing the right thing.
Conclusion
Thus, according to Kant, the moral value of an act arises if the act is a consequence of official obligation and understanding of what is right. Value arises if the intention fits into universal law. The moral law is the primary condition for forming good will and duty, which obliges a person to do what is right. According to Kant, duty is the understanding and commitment to do moral actions without regard to consequences or one’s desires.
Works Cited
Vaughn, Lewis. Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning, Theory, and Contemporary Issues. 6th ed. W. W. Norton & Company, 2022.