#22: Notes on "Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals"
Thoughts about Kant: What Is Deontology Really? And, A Bestiary of Moral Beings.
A week or two ago I finished reading Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, and a friend asked me for some thoughts, so I wrote this post as a reply. Here it is in a mostly unedited form.
As a more general, opening thought, I found the text refreshing, insofar as it built on itself rather than relying on discursive imports. Of course, the ideas of other philosophers were present throughout, but mostly as objects of critique, rather than as a basic requirement for understanding. The exception may be Kant’s use of Plato, which is still not fully explicit, but which does permeate his concepts in a deep way that cannot be unseen once you make the connection.
As to claims of Kant’s difficulty, I found that his ideas do require some careful tracing, but this makes the text easier, insofar as if you’re paying attention to how he approaches his claims, then he will basically never say something that “makes no sense” within the context he’s already developed. It all feels coherent in a way I feel is often lacking in dense theoretical texts. I also appreciate the idea that he’s writing for “a general educated audience”, rather than someone deeply immersed within a historical discourse.
Anyway, without further ado, enough with the opinions and onto the notes.
Moral Descriptivity
One of the big things that struck me about Groundwork was the intention of the text. Unlike the common view of moral texts as saying "here's how to make the world a better place", Kant seems solely interested in understanding a certain "sublime" feeling one gets when following one's duty. He's following the thread of existing emotion (perhaps arising from "sensitive reason", as E. Carrière might have it), rather than trying to produce "should"s. Insofar as he's investigating an empirical phenomenon, Kant is really trying to do science, in an old school gentleman scientist way!
It seems like the most longstanding moral theories take a similar approach, of saying "humans already have a moral intuition, so I'm going to analyze a piece of it to see how it works", and it often only gets turned into a prescriptive theory in retrospect. At no point does Kant advocate for "deontology", rather he offers it as an explanatory mechanism. We could even go so far as to say that the moral sublimity of utilitarianism flows from its maxim of "one shall do the greatest good" (or similar), which has the (psycho)logical form of a categorical imperative.
It's on the basis of Kant's moral theory as descriptive that Freud feels able to make the claim that the superego is the categorical imperative, insofar as Freud seems to locate the "sublime" affect Kant describes in the direct channel between the id and the superego.
Christian Rationalist Fanfic
Another thing that struck me about Groundwork was how it immerses you in a little speculative world of beings. We can come up with a half-joking half-serious bestiary of philosophical beings:
"Nature" = the unreasonable space of stuff that happens without reason. Generally bad.
"Inclinations" or "Incentives" = specific outcomes that one might desire due to their nature (generally bad. See: "Nature").
"Hypothetical Imperatives" = a rule (or "law") that you should do something to achieve a specific outcome.
"Rational Beings" = humans and also other things that have the faculty of reason, which separates them from the contingency and unfreedom (see: "freedom") of nature (see: "nature"). What other things they could be, I know not, but maybe he was thinking about God? Who is famously not rational except in, well, Protestant theology...
"Categorical Imperative" = a rule (or "law") that you should do something on the basis of reason alone, without any reference to outcomes or specific things or objects.
"The Will" = an agent of causation that relies on the faculty of reason.
"Good Will" = the will that that is good in itself because it abides by the categorical imperative.
"Duty" or "Obligation" = the feeling you get when your nature is in conflict with your good will,
"Holy Will" = the will that always simply does what is morally right all the time without ever so much as wanting to do otherwise. The holy will never feels duty or obligation because its nature is in total alignment with good will. Who possesses a holy will? I don't know of anyone. Maybe Jesus?
"Freedom" = the independence of the will from incentives or inclinations. Reason doesn't care about your incentives. Take THAT economists!
"Autonomy [of the will]" = the capacity of the will to set rules for itself, insofar as it would bind all possible wills to the same rule. Identical with freedom.
"The Kingdom of Ends" = a really great name for a metal band, and also the quasi-communist world that you can imagine will emerge when everyone follows the categorical imperative. Something like Heaven, maybe? Remember Aumann's Agreement Theorem (is the a priori not common knowledge to rational beings)? Basically if everyone acts totally rationally in this sense, then everyone becomes the same. E. Carrière's piece also talks about how suicidal annihilation technically abides by the categorical imperative, insofar as it's totally "lawful" in that you would have everyone do the same as you do. The Kantian dream might be said to be of annihilation, the erasure of all difference because all perfectly rational beings would choose the same in all circumstances. So, maybe the Kingdom of Ends isn't heaven, but instead the brain-upload-global-mind-merge-Last-Question fantasy of the (21st c.) Rationalists. Anyway I kind of get why Michael Vassar & co. are so into Kant now.
There's probably a bunch of other terms I forgot, but the idea here is that when Kant says he's doing "speculative philosophy", he means it like "speculative fiction" = sci-fi. I want to read Critique of Pure Reason so I can see how he breaks down his idea of "reason" itself, because it seems like "reason" does a lot and is basically taken for granted in Groundwork. I want to peer into the extended universe!
Bonus Round (Email Getters Wont See This!)
A Twitter Xdotcom thread I wrote about the text:
I've very much missed receiving these digests! Always interesting to see what's been on your plate.