111143 | 1/23/2015 | Ph104 - Foundations of Moral Evaluation | Mark Joseph T. Calano, Ph.D.

Reflection Paper 2 on Duty

Immanuel Kant’s ideals on duty appear oppressing at first. It makes you second-guess
whether you are doing things for the right reasons—such that Kant even makes you question if
having a reason is the correct frame of mind in doing whatever you do. Kant’s emphasis on
motives somehow clears up this dilemma. That at the end of all these questions, it boils down to
the motives, particularly the motive of duty. He believes that categorical imperatives are the
basis for an act to be considered moral—that it should follow universality, humanity, and
autonomy. And with these as the sole basis will we qualify a person’s duty.
“Do the right thing” is a famous advice/phrase/line often used to motivate one’s self. But
why would someone do what is right? Is it because that’s what everybody believes to be right? Is
it because there’s a reward after this life? Is it because there’s a fear for punishment? There are
two qualifiers that I think should be considered in understanding Kant. First is through the
motive and/or intent and second is through responsibility. But in whichever method of analyzing
duty, the only certain idea that Kant wants to instill is that whatever the end goal is, you should
do whatever follows the categorical imperatives. On lying, the act of telling a lie already fails the
three imperatives. It cannot be universal because if you lie all the time, nothing would be
understood and nothing would make sense. It cannot always be applied because it will not help
anyone. It does not even treat humans as humans themselves but rather, the person becomes a
victim by succumbing to the desire to lie. There is no real freedom. Yes, lying is autonomous
which makes it difficult to monitor. Even if the lie led to a better end, the fear of being caught
still overpowered the fact that the lie was recognized to be wrong. That the real motivation in
telling the truth is not the want to correct the lie that was formulated, nor was it because it
violates the person on the receiving end of the lie would be hurt but instead, it’s because there’s a
need to tell the truth because that’s the prevailing rule and everyone should tell the truth all the
time. It does not matter whether you told the truth eventually or not, it’s the fact that a lie was
told. The motive for telling the lie might be because it protects a person from being hurt.
However, the motive is not enough. It should come hand in hand with the responsibility for your
own actions.
In our freedom, we should act responsibly. Duty should not be forgotten and motives
should be set straight. Kant tells us not to do what is good because there’s a reward in the end.
He tells us to do what is right, what is good and what our duties are despite the uncertainty of the
promise of a good life. Kant teaches us to be good people no matter what the rewards are. Our
duties should be lived out with the categorical imperatives as the baseline and the motives and
responsibility as the support qualifiers for one to be called as a person who has fulfilled his duty
and stretched his utmost capacity as a relational and giving being. Kant might sound oppressing
as I mentioned earlier because it can appear like you will not be able to do an act that is pure in
its entirety. However, it allows you to reflect upon what you do and makes room for you to
rethink the things you do in order to move forward to a more dutiful life.