Immanuel Kant was known for his philosophical views and principles. The definition of human dignity according to Kant is where human beings can act independently from others. The ability of one who can act independently from others can reason and rationally develop their thoughts are, according to Kant is given respect Gentzler (890). Viewing human being as capable and rational beings is a worthy position.
Respect should be at the forefront of human behavior and interaction. When you show respect for another person, you demonstrate that your level of morality is good. When you act in the opposite manner and mistreat other people, it shows that your immoral and do not care for other human beings which should be paramount. Kant believed that all human beings had intrinsic value that was unique to that person. There was none like that person, and no other object, or valuable asset can replace that person. Through this definition, a person is said to possess dignity.
Kant’s most famous writings are his work on the supreme principle of morality where there are three main formulas. Each building on the premise that a human being universally should be respected. The formula of the End in itself says that you should care for yourself the way you would want others to treat you thus enabling them to act independently from others. As individuals, we should not use each other but rather have range to demonstrate that morals can also be acted out for the good of others
Human dignity carries the idea that it is the supreme value. That people are ends in themselves and therefore should be objects of respect. Human beings are more than advanced than animals because we can reason. Another principle is the Kingdom of Ends where we must be active in shaping our world by acting upon whatever rational thought or moral provocation. There should not be any reason we cannot impact our world positively.
Everyone can make a contribution if they decide that their effort can be used to make a difference. For everyday living, human beings must act out according to the moral obligation of each person to respect themselves and be respected by those around them while refusing to show contempt or disrespect for people around you. In the Kingdom of Ends, using other individuals to get what you want will not happen, and every person will be given the respect that is due to them. Every decision made by an individual is because they have the liberty to choose what they will and then act on it.
These formulas directly connect with Kant’s idea of human dignity. Despite there being many applications of Kant’s Supreme principle of morality, there have also been a lot of criticisms of the principle. One criticism is that the formulas all are similar in premise that makes understanding them slightly tricky. While the formulas offer some good insight into human behavior, the formulas lack to address actions that are unintentional. Though we are human beings capable of rational thought and moral behavior, there is also the fact that certain factors may affect a person’s ability to act rationally and morally toward others.
Telling a lie is not a good moral trait. Though, in certain situations, there is no other answer you could give, for example, if you were in a dangerous situation, and your life depended on you lying would you be guilty? Telling a lie in order to avert death, does this mean that you are an immoral person? Kant’s formulas start to weaken as they fail to recognize certain aspects of life. Conversely, if an individual believes deeply that they are carrying out their moral obligation, and in this case, similar to what happened during the Second World War. German soldiers or official representing the government will say that the way they were treating the Jew was a moral obligation. Therefore do we accuse the official of wrong morals?
Kant’s theory lacks practicality and application in the real world. Only to a small extent can you agree. Though, on the other hand, consideration of human emotions and volatile situations can change a person to act in several ways that are outside of what Kant would call moral. Within the formulas, there is no real definition as to whether the person you are using as a means knows that you are using them. Kant has restricted the diverse nature of human beings as though there is no chance of anyone acting outside the given measures of what is moral.
Desiring for a system where no one will lie or mistreat another is not wrong, but there has to be a more practical look at the situations that face people on the day – to- day basis. Kant’s principle does not leave room for the unexpected .the idea is great and sounds good, but it is not practical and has a narrow scope on interrelations between people.
Conclusion
Kant’s Supreme Principle of morality can only be applied to a certain degree in today’s worlds. Though today, a more practical and feasible moral system needs to be formed. The basis can even be derived from Kant, but in terms of using the system for positive results, perhaps not in today’s world.
