Introduction
Born in the modern day Russia in 1724, Immanuel Kant is acknowledged as one of the most influential philosophers. He is well known for his ethical theory which adopts a deontological approach. The deontological approach brings to light two critical concepts namely duty and the universal moral law (Melden, 2013). The idea of the categorical imperative is central to Kant’s ethical theory. Under the categorical imperative, morality is not conditional to the prevailing circumstances or the outcome of an act. Instead, the morality of an action depends on whether it has been performed for the sake of duty or not (MacVean & Neyroud, 2012). The current paper examines Kant’s ethical theory, highlighting how it might apply to modern policing ethical practices.
Brief Historical Background Pertaining to Kant
It was in Königsberg, Prussia, which is the modern Russia, where Immanuel Kant was born and raised. Kant’s family was relatively poor, but he still managed to attend a Pietist school and later on the University of Königsberg between 1740 and 1747. Between 1747 and 1755, Kant served as a private tutor for several families within his home area (Birsch, 2013). Starting from 1755 to 1770, he worked as a Privatdozent at the University of Königsberg during which he lectured on a variety of subjects including metaphysics, diverse logic, mathematics, anthropology, ethics, and geography. His lecturing career eventually saw him become a professor in Mathematics and Logic in 1770. He went on to teach up to 1796, but it was until 1804 that he died. Kant's delicate health, modest income as well as demanding work restricted him to a quiet life (Melden, 2013). Kant rarely travels and did not marry given the peaceful nature of his life. From the popular tradition perspective, Kant comes out as a moralistic and rigid individual who was strongly dedicated to system and rule in his life as well as his work.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The school of philosophy in which Kant was predominantly educated was Leibniz-Wolffian philosophy, a radical form of dogmatic rationalism. However, his interest in the British science and philosophy had the most significant impact on his thoughts and ideas. His quest to bring to question the power of pure reason is evident even in the early works that he wrote before the discoveries that led him to the three Critiques (Melden, 2013). This is explicitly evident in his pre-critical work titled Enquiry Concerning the Clarity of the Principles of Natural Theology and Ethics (1763) in which he opines that reason forms the basis of the Wolffian ethical principle that individuals should carry out an action that brings about the most perfection. However, he is quick to point out that the Walffinian principle is an empty formalism, and that its content may have to be availed through feelings (Wood, 2007). Kant’s early works were influenced by scholars and thinkers such as Adam Smith, Francis Hutcheson, and Rousseau.
A Closer look at Kant’s Ethical Theory
According to Kant’s moral philosophy, whether an action is right or wrong does not depend on the consequences or outcomes, but whether the said action has been undertaken for the sake of duty (Wood, 2007). According to Kant, the categorical imperative is the outstanding principal of morality. He adds that the categorical imperative has the characteristics of an unconditional moral law or command for which people have no choice but to follow in their position as rational creatures (Arnold and Harris, 2012). The categorical imperative comes out as a universal law from which no one is exempted. However, the notion of goodwill is the central idea in Kant’s ethical theory.
Kant’s theory proposes that nature is both nonmoral and impersonal. As much as the world shows an order which indicates the possibility of a benevolent and great designer who avails meaning to every other thing that goes on around us, it is impossible to derive any knowledge about it with the human faculties which are limited (Altman, 2011). Kant demonstrates this in his first Critique, in which he affirms how impossible it is for metaphysics to be viewed as a science. Given the nonmoral way that the world functions, Kant’s ethics aim at locating the real of morals separately from the realm of nature (Altman, 2011). As a result, he presents the argument that morals have to be independent of the manner in which the world operates. Additionally, Kant's ethics proposes that an element of unconditionality must accompany morals since they must be rational and universal (Arnold and Harris, 2012). Kant’s moral philosophy aims at establishing the a priori principles upon which it is possible to identify when to make moral judgments based on the examination of practical reason and its structure.
To show the unconditional characteristic of the moral imperative, Kant clearly shows how the categorical imperative is different from other types of imperatives, more specifically the hypothetical imperative. The hypothetical imperative is valid for a specific limited group of people who, under given circumstances, have specific ends in view. A hypothetical imperative has certain conditions upon which it depends. Similarly, the assertorial imperatives are also conditional (Altman, 2011). According to Kant, the hypothetical rules of attaining assertorial imperatives are universally applicable. However, the fact that they are only valid given the condition that individuals pursue these ends makes them conditional. From Kant’s perspective, the rules that have to be observed in the quest to acquire happiness are assertorial laws. Since such rules are conditional, Kant does not view them as being part of morality. For Kant, it is a must of the categorical imperative to be conditional. He views the moral law as not being dependent on any of our goals or purposes (Wood, 2007). Based on these views, it can be argued that Kant’s ethical theory opposes the consequential and teleological ethical theories which link ethics to external conditions.
Central to Kantian ethics is also the idea of goodwill. According to Kant, there is nothing that can be referred to as good without qualification but for a goodwill. He posits that those things that are intrinsically good remain good even when they exist just alone. From Kant's perspective, the goodwill is the final criterion through which the moral worth of an action can be determined (Wood, 2007). Kant asserts that a right action has to be universally right. This implies that it has to be the same for every person regardless of their circumstances, tastes, and inclinations. A proper action has to be in line with duty, but an act that is in line with duty does not have to be right necessarily. Kant clearly distinguishes those actions that are carried out for the sake of duty and those that are in accordance with duty (Wood, 2007). Actions that are in line with duty are performed for the achievement of specific ends and goals, although most of the time they may conform to the dictates of duty and reason. Kant’s ethics propose that people perform good actions with the knowledge that it is their duty and not because of certain objectives (Arnold and Harris, 2012).
Kant’s Ethical Theory and Modern Policing
Kant's ethical theory, also known as ethical formalism, proposes that an action based on duty is genuinely moral. The idea of duty is of great significance to policing, and law enforcement since law enforcers are bound by the law to carry out their duties. A duty refers to something that one has to undertake or execute, irrespective of whether one wants or not. A duty might come attached with a negative professional or personal consequence, but it stands out as imperative since it is an obligation. Miller (2009) points out that there are two paradigms of policing, these are the traditional crime fighter role and the more recent public service or community policing role. In the US, the most prominent paradigm is the crime fighter role of policing. However, this does not imply that the public service paradigm is absent. This paradigm is more predominant in Europe. Miller (2009) points out that the public service paradigm can be identified with the community policing in which the police are friendly and easily mingle with members of the society with the objective of promoting social peace. This approach is more rights-based and duty oriented as per the ethical formalism. This is unlike crime control paradigm which is less formal and more utilitarian in terms of approach.
There are two types of duties that Kant's ethics identified. These are hypothetical or conditional imperatives and categorical imperatives. A hypothetical/conditional imperative refers to the duty that is required to achieve a set objective. From a law enforcement perspective, the hypothetical duty of a police officer can be seen as solving as many cases as possible to be considered for a promotion as a detective ( Perez and Moore, 2012). The Categorical imperative, on the other hand, is an unconditional duty or rule. Here the duty has to be done and remains the same irrespective of the effect of a decision. From the law enforcement perspective, an example of the categorical imperative is the domestic assault policy which calls upon police officers to charge perpetrators with an assault in the presence of sufficient evidence. The officers have a duty to do so, their wishes or outcomes of their actions notwithstanding.
The categorical imperative, as described by Kant, states that every other rational being “exists as an end in himself, not merely as a means (Perez and Moore, 2012).” This implies that it is unethical for people to use others to arrive at the desired outcome. According to Kantian ethics, it is wrong for an individual to make a promise without having any intention of honoring the said promise. Within the policing domain, a police officer who assures a witness that they will not testify against a suspect if they present a statement would be using the said witness as a means to an end, and would therefore not be acting ethically from the Kantian perspective. The duty to determine which witness will testify and those who will not lie with the counsel and not the investigating police officer. Coercion is a technique that police officers frequently use to get information from suspects and witnesses. Kantian ethics view the utilization of this technique as using people as a means to an end and as such is unethical.
Many times, law enforcement officers are required to carry out their duties, the personal costs notwithstanding. When faced with a duty they may wish not to carry out, law enforcement officers have to take into consideration the fact that when they took the oath, the did agree to carry out the duties. As such, they have no option but to engage in the duties they swore to undertake, failure to which their actions will be deemed unethical from the Kantian perspective. Law enforcement officers have to carry out their duties in good faith, meaning that they should always consider the absence or presence of morality in the duty.
References
Altman, M. C. (2011). Kant and applied ethics: The uses and limits of Kant's practical philosophy . John Wiley & Sons.
Arnold, D. G., & Harris, J. D. (Eds.). (2012). Kantian business ethics: Critical Perspectives . Edward Elgar Publishing.
Birsch, D. (2013). Introduction to ethical theories: A Procedural approach . Waveland Press.
MacVean, A., & Neyroud, P. (2012). Police ethics and values . Learning Matters.
Melden, A. (2013). Ethical theories . Read Books Ltd.
Miller, J. M. (Ed.). (2009). 21st Century Criminology: A reference handbook (Vol. 1). Sage.
Perez, D. W., & Moore, J. A. (2012). Police Ethics . Cengage Learning.
Wood, A. W. (2007). Kantian ethics . Cambridge University Press.
