Kant's famous First Formulation of the Categorical Imperative
Kant's famous First Formulation of the Categorical Imperative reads, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Kant taught morality as a matter of following maxims of living that reflect absolute laws. "Universal" is a term that allows for no exceptions, and what is universal applies always and everywhere. Don't forget about the second formulation of the categorical imperative which states, "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means." It is just as important.
For the initial post, address one of the following sets of questions:
What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side given a contemporary debate, such as those concerning animal rights, stem cell research, abortion, the death penalty, and so forth?
Elaborate in detail the ethical positions arrived at by using the Kantian categorical imperative relative to the long standing debate surrounding the death penalty or abortion. Argue the ethics from the point of view of the prisoner or from the fetus
Evaluate the ethical positions in part two. You will want to detail whether they are convincing, logical, correct, consistent, etc.
When using Kant's First Formulation of the Categorical Imperative to examine these hotly contested issues, it becomes apparent that universal maxims cannot be applied in all circumstances due to varying contexts and situations surrounding each case. Regarding capital punishment specifically, an individual may adhere to an absolute moral law that forbids taking human life under any circumstance; however, when contemplating whether this principle should be made universal law (i.e., applicable in all cases), doubts arise because there are instances where execution of a criminal could potentially contribute greater good than not executing him/her would have done had they been spared their lives.
Similarly with regards to abortion debates involving fetuses considered viable outside of the womb yet still inside their mother’s body at late-term pregnancies (i.e., beyond 20 weeks gestation), Kant’s Second Formulation provides insight into which ethical positions should take precedence by stating that humanity should never simply serve as a means but rather always treated as ends in themselves – meaning that individual autonomy must always remain intact even if someone else stands to benefit from overriding it.
In evaluating these respective ethical views derived from applying Kantian ethics, it appears convincing and logical for them to hold true given their adherence with respect for others' rights coupled with considerations regarding collective outcomes that result from making decisions based on conscience instead of convenience or bias alone. Ultimately while some concessions may need to be made as far as what constitutes “universal law," following through on principles outlined by Kant helps ensure consistency across varying cases while respecting our shared human dignity regardless of specific contexts or situations involved.