Kant claimed that we experience morality as a conflict, our moral duty pulls us in one direction, while our bodily desires (emotions, feelings, sympathies, inclinations) pull us in another. But humans are able to rise above their bodily desires and self-interest they are able to act according to ______________.
For Kant moral right and wrong do not depend on the exterior consequences of our actions or on achieving happiness. Instead, right and wrong depend on the interior choices of reason. Moral goodness lies _____________, in our will: the ability of our reason to choose for itself. “It is impossible to think of anything in the universe, or even beyond it, that is good without qualification except a ______________. A good will is not good because of the actions it carries out or the effects it brings about. Nor does goodness depend on its ability to achieve certain results. A good will is good simply in virtue of its willing. That is, its goodness lies in itself.”
For Kant, to act according to reason is to act as we believe all humans should act. It is to follow rules we believe it is everyone’s _____________ to follow. Kant laid out his ideas on ethics in a short book, The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Here he introduces some new terms. A maxim he says is a rule that one person follows. A universal law is a rule that applies to everyone. Kant summarizes his ethics in a principle he calls _____________________________.
But if Kant’s categorical rule is like the golden rule, then what makes the categorical imperative different or special? What was new about Kant’s categorical imperative is actually in essence only that he says that we don’t need a superhuman authority to find morality. We just need our own reason. Our reason _____________________________.
In Kant, then, the moral life is based on the same principles everyone else should live by. Reason requires _____________. Consistency means living by the same rules we think others should follow.
The strength of Kantian ethics appeals to our intuitions that most well brought up people in our culture have, and these include the notion that the heart of immorality typically is to treat yourself as an _____________. To do something that you wouldn’t want other people to do.
Kant’s 2 versions of the categorical imperative sound very different, yet they are closely connected to the same social ideal from the Enlightenment. This is the idea that we all belong to a community of ____ and ____ persons.
Indeed, Kant’s ethical ideas have been adapted and modified by later philosophers. But Kant did not die young. Starting in his mid-50s he turned out books which set new directions for virtually every branch of philosophy. In the closing passing from the Critique of Practical Reason, the young admirer of Newton, and the much older ethicist, seemed to speak together: “Two things move the mind with ever increasing admiration and awe the more often and more steadily we reflect on them: the ______________________________above and the ____________________________ within.”
non-public mentality of the starvation striker accordingly turn out to be a focus for docs and doctor to decide whether the individual has the intellectual functionality to make his very own judgment and decision to optimistically stop his movements in a reasonable time. In Herczegfalvy v Austria, force feeding of a prisoner become justified on the basis of therapeutic and scientific necessity. Mr Herczegfalvy turned into diagnosed suffering from paranoia querulans, inside the view of scientific judgement he became incapable to make the decision for himself. Regardless his refusal to consent any scientific remedy and examination that would be conducted upon him, the court docket at the above instances determined no violations to Article three of ECHR against force administering food. Article 3 on prohibition on torture and Article 2 on the proper to lifestyles (ECHR) conflicted with each other in this be counted. inside the case of starvation strike, medical treatment plays a key position, it has dilemmas while the remedy opposite to the patient’s wish, no consent given from the patient, and how a ways is such treatment might be amounted to violate one character dignity consequently situation to inhuman, degrading treatment, and torture. medical doctors have freedom to interact scientific judgment to its sufferers, however as Dolores mentioned, it turns into a quandary as “the liberty of scientific judgment is a two-edged sword: the ethical beliefs of the health practitioner might also struggle with a prisoner’s patient expressed needs not to be handled. “ prison government and medical officers must in any manner technique the starvation striker and tell them at the chance for pursuing hunger strike or the risk on pressure-feeding, right here the right to appreciate the personal life (Article 8) need to be “simply engaged in conditions concerning disclosure of statistics in order to enable people to make choices that could have an effect on their fitness”. In 1981 Irish hunger strike, the British government decided now not to force-feed the hunger striker. Margaret Thatcher refused to provide any concessions and said “We are not organized to recall special category repute for sure corporations of humans serving sentences for crime. Crime is crime is crime, it isn't always political”. 10 hunger strikers died to shield their “five demands”. In Robb v Secretary of nation for the house department, the want of the hunger striker, who had a legitimate of thoughts and the capability to recognize the danger and the outcomes of his selections, to refuse the clinical remedy must be reputable. J Thorpe stated: “the first principle is that all and sundry’s body is inviolate and evidence in opposition to any shape of physical molestation. (…) Secondly, the principle of self-dedication requires that respect have to be given to the wishes of the affected person. so that if an grownup of sound mind refuses, but unreasonably, to consent to remedy or care by way of which his existence could or might be prolonged the docs liable for his care should deliver effect to his needs despite the fact that they do now not take into account it to be in his interest to do so. ” In contras to Leigh v Gladstone (1909) case, in Robb case the secretary of state became granted the declarations that clinical and jail body of workers ought to lawfully abstain from their duty from taking force synthetic food or prolonging the life of the affected person inside the foundation of the affected person’s refusal to the scientific treatment. here, Andrew Grubb advised that during view of the above resulted to the choice i>