“Thou ought top’s, therefore thou canst.” This is what Kant’s words implied.
Immortality of soul:
According to Kant, the second postulate of ethics is the Immortality of the soul. Morality lies in winning the continuous struggle between desire and duty but this activity is so difficult that it seems well nigh impossible to complete it in one limited life. Thus in the absence of many lives, the very possibility of the attainment of the aim of morality is undermined. Consequently, it is indispensable to recognize that the soul does not perish with the body but rather continues life by assuming other bodies.
Faith in the existence of god:
In Kant’s opinion third moral postulate is the faith in the existence of God. In the world we see that the result of morality is not always good but rather it is often the bad people who flourish.
As Kant opined, perfect good comes after the assimilation of virtue and happiness. Thus if a virtuous person suffers in this world and moral laws are true at the same time, it is then necessary to concede that God will grant them happiness in another world. Thus God establishes complete good by adjusting between virtue and happiness and Maintains morality by giving to man according to his desires in this way, according to Kant there are three postulates of morality- freedom of will, immortality of soul and the existence of God.
According to Kant, it is virtue which is the ultimate end. Morality is the supreme highest goal. In the words of Kant, “There is nothing in the world, or even out of it, that can be called good without qualification, except a good will.
” Good will is the one jewel which shines and glories in its own light. According to Kant, virtue is good will. Thus the ultimate end is the doing of duty for the sake of duty. But according to Kant the complete good includes happiness besides virtue.
Kant also propounds that moral aim is our own perfection and an addition to other people’s happiness. This is also the corollary of Kant’s second moral maxim, limits is the reason why Kant recognizes of God as a moral postulate.
Freedom of the individual:
A man is free in the form of a moral being. Man is autonomous.
Thus, his aim is to be self controlled. Man is on the one hand a sensible being and an intellectual one on the other. Reason and sensation are the highest and lowest parts of man. The senses always lure man in their own direction and act as if blind, but his moral consciousness always reminds him of his intrinsic freedom from the passions. Thus a struggle between the reason and the passions goes on. According to Kant, the morality of the volition will be as great as the intensity of the struggle. Freedom lies in acting in accordance with the internal intellectual soul having triumphed over the lower level of the soul, and this is also the aim of a moral life.
Good will is a rational will. It applies its own: law upon itself. Volition should proceed on categorical imperative. To proceed according to reason is freedom, and dependence to follow emotion.
Negation of sentience:
Thus, Kant holds that moral life does not have any place for .feeling, emotion or sentience.
To work under the control of desires is Hedonism. In it reason is merely a means and such Hedonism is immoral. A moral life is a rational life. From it, feelings and emotions should be completely eliminated. Kant grants purity to only one feeling and that is faith in the moral. Cut this is not actually emotion.
Thus Kant looks upon every emotion as immoral.
Nature of moral law:
In Kant’s opinion, moral law is a categorical imperative. There is on law or authority over it.
A duty is always a duty, and duty is obligatory. It should be done any way. Moral laws are universal. They originate only in the real essence of the doer. Their basis is the very moral nature of man.
Other objects are good in a limited way because their importance is only in special circumstances but good will is good regardless of the circumstance in view of its propriety being independent of the results. Good will is the ultimate good and good will is rational will. Thus, acts in harmony with the moral law are good in themselves. Actions done with desires and feelings are immoral; it being of no consequence that the desires are pure and the feelings the highest Moral quality is an internal quality. It is Kant’s dictum to do your duty, be the result what it will.
Moral laws are not qualified by experience. They are not relative to circumstances. In Kant’s opinion, if it is a moral duty to tell the truth then every person should tell the truth in every circumstance.
In the Mahabharat war, the lie perpetrated by Yudhishthira and conveyed to Dronacharya would have been an extremely immoral act in Kant’s opinion. Moral laws cannot be violated in any circumstances whatsoever.
Moral Judgment is an unqualified judgment:
Kant had absolute faith in the value of Ethics.
Moral laws are the orders of reason while other laws are inspired by the desires. Laws inspired merely by desires are no more than hypothetical imperatives. They are dependent upon external result and circumstances. Laws of a sensual life contradict the rational laws. External goal can only be a hypothetical imperative. For example, earning wealth cannot be an unqualified command because it depends upon the situation, need and ability of the individual. But on the contrary, moral laws, being rational laws, are categorical imperatives.
They have 110 scope for any exceptions, and they must be satisfied in all circumstances. Therefore they are. Categorical imperatives. Other laws are based on experience.
Moral law is a-priori. They are related, not to ‘what’ but to ‘ought’. They are axiological and factual.