Kant also tells us of the Motive of Duty; here he says that doing duty should be because you are doing it for morally good reasons, not for self interest or to show off, but because you are doing it for yourself. For example: I play softball, and some people on my team will go and hit on their own but when they do it, they announce it to the whole team and brag about themselves putting in work. Others will do work on their own to actually make themselves better, but they will not tell anyone or make a big scene with it, they are going specifically for themselves. Another example: One person goes to a homeless shelter to serve food to them, they do it because it makes them feel better about themselves and for good moral reason. Another person is also serving food but afterwards they are posting on social media, telling people the act of kindness they did, just to get a "good job" from other people and for other reasons that do not involve actually helping others.
I agree with Kant with his definitions of duty. He makes it simple to understand saying it is something to do for the good of the situation and for moral reasons. We should do our duty for the good of society and not for show for others. If we keep that definition of duty in mind society could possibly be a better place.
I agree with you completely! It seems like the only reason people do things nowadays is to get praise for it--"I volunteered here," or "I gave money to this cause," etc. But this is not the point. The point is to do something good to help someone out and to make yourself better. This reminds me of the Bible verses Matthew 6:2-4 "So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But when you give to the poor, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you." Although I doubt Kant was a Christian, so he didn't make this point based on Biblical teachings, I still feel like it expresses the same idea.
ReplyDeleteI agree that if more people did things that they ought to do because it is their duty then society would be a better place. However, I do not think that this is totally realistic, and therefore while Kant's definition may seem nice, it doesn't portray a realistic world. Unfortunately many people only do something they ought to do so that they can receive personal gain. They think that it will make people think they are a good person when they might not actually be a good person. There are other factors that would prevent someone from doing what they ought to do such as personal safety. Exceptions like this make the definition of duty a bit confusing. I believe Kant wants the definition to be simple, but that is very hard to do since the world is not a simple place.
ReplyDeleteI agree that if people as a whole did things because it was their duty than the world would most likely be in better shape than it is today. Despite the fact that this is a good idea, I would agree with what Maddie has said. That we need to be more realistic about the fact that it is in human nature to want to others to think highly of you. So by doing a good deed you are in essence working for a personal gain rather than doing it because it is something you ought to do.
ReplyDelete