Sample Explication Paper on Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Section I, 4:394 Show Instructions: Explicate Kant's argument in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Sections I, 4:394.
In this paper, I will explicate Kant’s arguments in Section 1: Transition from Common Rational Moral Cognition to Philosophical Moral Cognition of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of
Morals. Kant attempts to show that the good will is the only thing that is good without limitation. In the first two paragraphs, Kant lists characteristics which are not good without limitation, implying that the good will is the only thing good without limitation. In the third paragraph, Kant explains further what good without limitations means and what makes the good will good without limitation. In addition to this main conclusion, Kant also claims that the good will
is necessary to make all good things good. I will show that Kant’s arguments are both valid, with the addition of the implicit premises explained in the paper. (1) Talents of the mind can be extremely evil and harmful if they stem from a will that is not good. Here, in the first three premises, Kant is appealing to our intuitions. Kant takes these things to be part of our “common rational moral cognition,” and will move from these intuitions towards the philosophical explanation. Kant is trying to eliminate all of these characteristics as candidates for the category “good without limitation.” If he can validly show that no good thing, except the good will, is good without limitation, then he will have proven the conclusion that the only good thing that is good without limitation is the good will. To eliminate these characteristics as possible qualities that are good without limitation, we must supply: (6) Talents of the mind, qualities of temperament, and gifts of fortune
require the presence of something else to be good. The above two premises are intuitive and reasonable. In reading the first paragraph, we find that (6) is obvious—Kant explicitly says that these qualities may be great and wished-for, but only if the will behind them is good. From this, we can take that these qualities need something else to make them good. Also, Kant states the conclusion right away, and so we know that he is trying to show that the good will is the only thing good without limitation. So, by listing these goods, he is trying to show that they are good with limitation. From these two premises, we can conclude: (8) Therefore, talents of the mind, qualities of temperament, and gifts of fortune are not good without limitation. (from 6, 7)
This is the first step in Kant’s strategy. In the first paragraph, he aims to show that talents of the mind, qualities of temperament, and gifts of fortune are, while good when they stem from a good will, only good in a limited way. Once he shows us that these good things are limited goods, he moves on to a new set of qualities in the second paragraph. (12) For moderation in affects and passions, self-control, and sober reflection to be evil and
harmful, it is sufficient that the will behind them is not good. (P) And, again, we can conclude from these two implicit premises: (14) Therefore, moderation in affects and passion, self-control, and sober reflection are not good without limitation. (from 13, 7) Now that
Kant has given us examples of things that are not good without limitation, he must show us explicitly, first, that the good will is good without limitation, and second, that the good will is the only thing that is good without limitation. (19) It is not the case that the good will is good because of its effects. From (20), we can conclude the following: (21) A good will is good in itself. (from 20) Now that we have established that a good will is good in itself, we can use this to prove that a good will is good without limitation. All we need to do is add the following implicit premise: (22) The good will does not need the presence of anything else to be good. (from 21) From this premise, and the conclusion prior to premise (25) which states what the good will is good in itself, we can conclude: (23) Therefore, a good will is good without limitation. (from 21, 7) Kant now needs to show that the good will is the only thing good without limitation. Nowhere does Kant explicitly state that the good will is the only thing good without limitation, and so, to make valid this conclusion, we must draw on multiple premises that show all other things besides the good will are limited goods. Premises (8) and (14) exclude all the attributes that Kant mentions from the category of “good without limitation.” Drawing on this, we can supply the following implicit premise that will show deductively that the good will is the only thing good without limitation: (16) Talents of mind, qualities of temperament, gifts of fortune, moderation in affects and passions, self-control, sober reflection, and the good will are the only good things. (P) From (16), (8), and (14), we can exclude every quality in (16) from the category of “good without limitation,” except for the good will, showing that the good will must be the only thing good without
limitation. (4) For talents of mind, qualities of temperament, and gifts of fortune to be evil and harmful, it is sufficient that the will behind them is not good. (from 1, 2, 3) And from (4), we can logically conclude: (5) Therefore, the good will is necessary to make talents of the mind, qualities of temperament, and gifts of fortune good. (from 1, 2, 3) Now that we have shown (5), we must show that the other qualities Kant mentions in the second paragraph also require the good will to be good. We first show that these other qualities are not good without limitation. Then, we supply the premise: (15) A good will is necessary to make moderation in affects and passions, self-control, and sober reflection good. Now that we have listed all of the common categories of characteristics which people normally consider good, we need to get to the conclusion that the good will is necessary to make all good things good. To come to this conclusion, we need only to supply the following premise: (16) Talents of mind, qualities of temperament, gifts of fortune, moderation in affects and passions, self-control, sober reflection, and good will are the only good things. (P) If the above characteristics are the only good things, and all of them require the good will to make them good, we can validly conclude: (17) Therefore, a good will is necessary to make all good things good. (from 5, 15, 16) So, we have shown
that Kant has made the argument that the good will is necessary to make all good things good, in addition to his argument that the good will is only thing that is good without limitation. Reconstruction from Kant's Groundwork, Section One Objections to Kant's Argument in Groundwork, Section One What is Kant's project in the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals?In his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant portrays the supreme moral principle as an unconditional imperative that applies to all of us because we freely choose to impose upon ourselves a law of pure practical reason. Morality is revealed to be a matter of autonomy.
What is Metaphysics of Morals According to Kant?The Metaphysics of Morals is Kant's final major work in moral philosophy. In it, he presents the basic concepts and principles of right and virtue and the system of duties of human beings as such.
What does Kant say in groundwork?The basic idea, as Kant describes it in the Groundwork, is that what makes a good person good is his possession of a will that is in a certain way “determined” by, or makes its decisions on the basis of, whatever basic moral principles there may be.
What is Kant's main point?At the foundation of Kant's system is the doctrine of “transcendental idealism,” which emphasizes a distinction between what we can experience (the natural, observable world) and what we cannot (“supersensible” objects such as God and the soul). Kant argued that we can only have knowledge of things we can experience.
|