Categorical Imperativ
Categorical Imperative Pros and Cons, Advantages and disadvantages in overview. Pros and Cons List
Since the start, Cons lead with 58%. Over the last 12 months, Cons lead with 68%.
- Since the start (Sep 2014)2,521 votes42% Pros58% Cons
- Last 5 years2,203 votes40% Pros60% Cons
- Last 12 months254 votes32% Pros68% Cons
- Last 30 days16 votes50% Pros50% Cons
Year by year new votes per year
| Year | New votes, pros and cons | Majority | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 53% Cons | 19 | |
| 2022 | 69% Cons | 286 | |
| 2021 | 62% Cons | 967 | |
| 2020 | 59% Cons | 490 | |
| 2019 | 51% Cons | 223 | |
| 2018 | 53% Cons | 247 | |
| 2017 | 54% Pros | 161 | |
| 2016 | 59% Pros | 96 | |
| 2015 | 60% Pros | 25 | |
| 2014 | 57% Cons | 7 | |
| Total | 58.2% Cons | 2,521 |
This list is also available in German: Kategorischer Imperativ
- Top post
if everyone acted accordingly, the law would no longer be worth anything
- Top post
Is not paid attention to consequences
universal moral principle
Action can include several maxims that contradict themselves and then do not weight which one prevails
Decide intentions
Cannot be applied to everything.
If everyone acted accordingly the world would be a better place
No one is likely to make a decision in his favor there
Categorical Imperativ provides orientation
Action from inclination is not of value
often the Categorical Imperativ provides clear instructions for action that can be checked
Consequences of an action are not considered, only the intention is decisive
the Categorical Imperative provides a standard for evaluating rules and actions
Why can't actions be morally good not purely out of duty, but out of inclination?
kant creates awareness for human dignity and recognizes that people are not "for sale" and assigns a high value to the reason of the human being.
It is impossible to see what motives people act upon
Categorical Imperative largely reflects our Basic Ethical Position
Used far too little these days
show no weakness
The theory sometimes contradicts our moral institutions
Categorical imperative makes actionable
you can not disregard your feelings
It can bring order to the world and prevents too much chaos because it is applicable to the essential things.
Neglect of concrete situations in favor of a general rule
goodwill is also taken into account in the event of negative consequences
Not everyday suitability,as inclinations almost always play a role
You can easily reassure yourself and be satisfied/in one with your decision.
Conflict of duties Image of man too optimistic -unreasonable people Cold-hearted moral feelings are not taken into account
important and correct
Can not have sex before marriage
Unegoistic
Overemphasis of reason over other areas of human existence.
Is better than utilitarianism.
Is it conceivable to determine all human actions by a law?
Decisions can be made rationally
Man as an individual universal procedures ,rules do not make sense
Simply applicable
too positive view of man (not always reasonable) --> selfish, not duty-driven actions
depending on situation and person
In view of global present-day problems, is it not absolutely necessary to think about the long-term consequences of our actions (for later generations)?
it is not subjective and cannot be circumvented by clever argumentation (if you drive black, you drive black)
An outsider cannot distinguish whether an action is performed out of duty (good) or only in accordance with duty (bad, since inclinations have an influence).
that sounds quite good
Not so applicable today, too many positions are accepted as equivalent
No dogmatics
No consideration of the emotional aspect
Everyone can participate and make their decisions and opinions
Outdated thinking (not open-minded thinking)
has no double standards (organ donation)
Think black and white
It is easier to make the right decision because you can always ask the question of the k. It is easier to make the right decision, because you can always ask the question of the imperative, but never know the pleasure that an action causes.