Formula of the Universal Law (Kant's Ethics #5)

Untangle Philosophy

1 Feb 202307:19

Summary

TLDRThis video explains Kant's Law of Nature formulation of the categorical imperative, focusing on moral actions guided by universal principles. The video defines a maxim as a rule for action and explores Kant's test for determining if a maxim can be universally applied without contradiction. It highlights two key types of contradictions—'contradiction in conception' and 'contradiction in the will'—using examples like false promises and refraining from helping others. The video also addresses a common criticism that specific maxims could pass Kant's test and refutes it by emphasizing the necessity of universality.

Takeaways

📜 The 'law of nature' formulation of the categorical imperative states to act according to a maxim you can will to become a universal law.
📖 A maxim is a general principle or rule of action, representing both the action and the circumstances under which it takes place.
🧠 Willing something means imagining it being done universally, as though it were a law of nature.
🧪 The formula creates a moral test: if you can will that a maxim becomes a universal law without contradiction, the action is morally permissible.
🚫 If you can't will that a maxim becomes universal, the action is morally forbidden due to a contradiction.
❌ There are two types of contradictions: a contradiction in conception (self-contradictory maxims) and a contradiction in the will (conflicting wills).
💸 The false promise example shows a contradiction in conception, as a world where everyone lies to get money cannot function logically.
🤝 The example of not helping others passes the contradiction in conception test but fails the contradiction in the will test, as rational agents would want to be helped when in need.
🧐 A common criticism of Kant's theory suggests that specific maxims could pass the test, but Kant counters that maxims must be general to be considered universal.
🎥 In future videos, the discussion will move toward perfect and imperfect duties, and other formulations of the categorical imperative.

Q & A

What is a maxim according to Kant's Categorical Imperative?
-A maxim is a general principle or rule upon which we act, containing the action one is proposing to do and the circumstances in which the action takes place.
How does Kant's Law of Nature formulation of the Categorical Imperative work?
-It states that one should act according to a maxim that they can will to become a universal law, meaning the action must be reasonable and applicable universally without contradiction.
What does it mean to 'universalize' a maxim?
-Universalizing a maxim means imagining everyone following the same rule or principle as if it were a law of nature. The action should be something everyone can do without contradiction.
What is the difference between contradiction in conception and contradiction in the will?
-A contradiction in conception occurs when the very idea of universalizing a maxim is self-contradictory, while a contradiction in the will happens when one wills two incompatible things at the same time.
Can you give an example of a contradiction in conception?
-Yes, the example of making a false promise to get money illustrates a contradiction in conception. If everyone lied to get money, no one would believe promises, making the act of lying to get money impossible.
What is a contradiction in the will, and can you provide an example?
-A contradiction in the will occurs when a person wills two conflicting desires. For example, if someone wills to never help others but also desires to be helped when in need, they create a contradiction.
Why is the maxim of lying to get money morally wrong according to Kant?
-The maxim is morally wrong because, if universalized, it would lead to a contradiction in conception: in a world where everyone lies to get money, no one would trust promises, and the act of lying would become ineffective.
Why does Kant argue that refraining from helping others is a contradiction in the will?
-Kant argues that not helping others is a contradiction in the will because rational agents would want help when in need. Wishing for help while also willing that no one should help others creates an inconsistency.
Can a highly specific maxim pass Kant's universal law test?
-No, highly specific maxims cannot pass the universal law test because they cannot be applied universally. A maxim like 'Colin from Cornwall can lie' is too specific and contradicts the notion of universal applicability.
How does Kant's Categorical Imperative avoid being too flexible, allowing any maxim to pass?
-Kant's Categorical Imperative avoids this by requiring maxims to be general enough to apply universally, preventing specific personal exceptions from being universalized.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 Understanding the Categorical Imperative and Maxims

This paragraph introduces Kant's law of nature formulation of the categorical imperative, which states that one should act according to a maxim that could be universalized as a law of nature. The paragraph defines a maxim as a general principle guiding action and provides an example: 'I will exercise whenever I feel stressed.' The key idea is that even if we don’t consciously consider a maxim while acting, it can be formulated based on the action and its context. The paragraph explains that willing a maxim to be universal means imagining everyone acting on it, and if that’s reasonable, the action is morally permissible.

05:01

🔄 Testing Maxims: Universal Law and Reason

This paragraph explores how the law of nature test works. It explains that the test is about reasoning, not about the consequences of universalizing a maxim. If we can will a maxim to become a universal law without contradiction, it is morally permissible. If not, it is morally forbidden. Two types of contradictions are introduced: contradiction in conception, where the action is self-contradictory, and contradiction in the will, where one’s wills conflict with each other. These contradictions render actions morally forbidden.

❌ Contradictions in Conception and the False Promise

Here, the focus is on contradiction in conception. The paragraph uses the example of making false promises to obtain money. If the maxim 'I will get money on a false promise whenever I am in need' is universalized, it leads to a contradiction: everyone would know that promises are lies, making it impossible to deceive and get money this way. The paragraph concludes that the action of lying to get money is morally wrong because it cannot exist as a universal law.

🙅‍♂️ Contradiction in the Will: Helping Others

This section addresses contradiction in the will. It uses the example of refraining from helping others even when one is well-off. If everyone adopted the maxim 'I will refrain from helping others in need,' it would pass the contradiction in conception test but fail the contradiction in the will. Rational agents would want to be helped when in need, so willing both to refrain from helping and to be helped creates a contradiction. The paragraph illustrates how willing contradictory maxims is irrational and morally impermissible.

🧐 Specific Maxims and a Common Criticism

The final paragraph tackles a criticism of Kant's theory. Some argue that any maxim can be made to pass the law of nature test by making it overly specific, like 'Colin from Cornwall can lie whenever he wants.' However, the response is that maxims must be capable of being universalized, and something so specific cannot be universal by definition. This highlights that universal laws must be general enough to apply to everyone. The paragraph concludes by dismissing the criticism as invalid, setting up the next topic on perfect and imperfect duties.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Maxim

A maxim is a general principle or rule that guides action. In the video, it refers to the specific rule behind an action, such as 'I will exercise whenever I feel stressed.' Kant’s ethical theory focuses on evaluating the morality of actions by examining their underlying maxims. For example, in the false promise case, the maxim is 'I will lie to get money whenever I need it.'

💡Categorical Imperative

The Categorical Imperative is Kant’s foundational moral principle that dictates that one should act according to maxims that can be universally willed as laws. This principle serves as the main test for determining the moral permissibility of actions. In the video, it is introduced through the formulation of the Law of Nature, which asks whether a maxim could be consistently willed as a universal law.

💡Universal Law

A universal law is a rule that applies to everyone without exception. In Kant’s framework, a maxim is only morally acceptable if it can be willed as a universal law. The video explains this by asking the viewer to imagine a world where everyone follows the same maxim, such as everyone lying to get money, which would lead to contradictions.

💡Contradiction in Conception

A contradiction in conception occurs when a maxim, if universalized, becomes logically impossible. The video uses the example of lying to get money: if everyone lied, trust would break down, and it would be impossible to lie successfully. Thus, such a maxim is self-contradictory and morally impermissible.

💡Contradiction in the Will

A contradiction in the will arises when a person wills two conflicting outcomes, making it impossible to act consistently. The video uses the example of refusing to help others while still expecting help when in need, showing how willing such a maxim universally would result in contradictory desires.

💡False Promising

False promising is an example used by Kant to illustrate a contradiction in conception. The maxim 'I will get money by making a false promise' becomes self-defeating if universalized, as trust in promises would erode, making it impossible to obtain money through false promises.

💡Willing

Willing, in Kantian ethics, refers to the act of mentally endorsing a maxim or action as something that could be done by everyone. The video clarifies that 'willing' in this context means conceiving of a world where everyone acts according to the same maxim, and testing if this is logically or practically possible.

💡Helping Others

Helping others is discussed as an ethical duty in Kant’s framework. The maxim of refusing to help others is used in the video to show a contradiction in the will. People would naturally want help when in need, so universalizing a refusal to help others leads to a conflict with the will to be helped.

💡Perfect Duties

Perfect duties are those that must always be followed because violating them leads to logical contradictions, as explained through the false promising example. In Kant’s ethics, these duties are stricter than imperfect duties, requiring absolute adherence.

💡Imperfect Duties

Imperfect duties are moral obligations that allow for flexibility in how they are fulfilled. The video mentions imperfect duties in relation to helping others. While one should generally help those in need, it’s not required in every situation, as long as the principle of helping others is respected.

Highlights

The law of nature formulation of the categorical imperative states: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can will it to become a universal law.

A maxim is a general principle or rule upon which we act; it contains both the action and the circumstances.

When willing a maxim as a universal law, we are imagining everyone following it as if it were a law of nature.

The test of the law of nature is whether a maxim can be willed as a universal law without contradiction.

If a maxim can be willed universally without contradiction, the action is morally permissible. If not, it is morally forbidden.

Kant introduces two types of contradictions that make a maxim morally forbidden: contradiction in conception and contradiction in the will.

A contradiction in conception occurs when the maxim itself is self-contradictory, like trying to will a four-sided triangle.

A contradiction in the will occurs when one wills conflicting actions, such as willing to walk with someone while also willing to avoid walking with that same person.

Kant's false promising example illustrates a contradiction in conception: if everyone lied to get money, lying would no longer work, rendering the maxim self-defeating.

In the refraining from helping others example, Kant argues there is a contradiction in the will: one cannot will both to be helped when in need and to refrain from helping others in need.

The maxim 'I will refrain from helping those in need whenever I can' passes the conception test but fails the will test.

Rational agents would always want to be helped in times of need, which creates a contradiction in willing to never help others.

A criticism of Kant's theory is that someone could pass the law of nature test by creating a very specific maxim, such as only one individual lying for personal gain.

Kant's defense against this criticism is that maxims must be general and universally applicable; a specific maxim cannot be universalized without contradiction.

Universal laws must be general, not specific to a single person or situation, as they need to apply to all rational beings equally.