Kant According to Kant's Moral

Kant According to Kant's moral theories, Ryan and her dog should not swim in her neighbor's pool -- even if it does benefit the dog's arthritis! Kant would want us to look at the situation regardless of what the consequences are (e.g., the neighbors finding out, Ryan getting in trouble, the dog not dying). None of these things should matter in Ryan's decision to do what she does.

One can do the right thing -- even if it causes unhappiness (e.g., the neighbors getting very angry) -- however, Ryan knows that swimming in the neighbor's pool is not the right thing, as she even tries to concoct ways in her head to make them think she is nice so they will let her swim in the pool. The neighbors don't like her, she has said this, so why would they want her to swim in their pool -- and her dog too? They wouldn't.

Kant would say that to be morally good, one has to do something with good will -- or good intention to want to do the right thing. This is not at all the case in Ryan's wanting to use her neighbor's pool. Swimming at night is just another excuse that Ryan has come up with to be able to swim without the neighbors knowing. None of the situations that Ryan has come up with demonstrate good will or a good intention to do the right thing.

Kant would argue that we give moral law to ourselves. If we decide not to lie to cheat on our spouse because we don't want to get a divorce because he or she supports us and a divorce is out of the question, then not cheating is not a morally good decision because we are not doing it because of our good will. There should be no qualifications, according to Kant, when one is making moral decisions.

Kant believes that every individual is a moral agent and we when act morally we give the moral law. This means that we let reason -- and reason only -- guide our will. So good will without any qualifications is making us do what we do. Kant would say that we should not let anything but reason's guidance propel our actions.

In the case of Ryan wanting to take her neighbor's flat-screen television because she can't afford one of her own a professor's salary is not acting in a moral way because Ryan obviously does not have an respect for her fellow human beings. She is not treating them with dignity, but rather she is feeling angry that she has something that she will never have.

Making the excuse to take the television and give it to Big Brothers/Big Sisters is a way that Ryan is justifying her desire to steal the television. The interesting thing about Ryan is that she believes because she is a professor who works long hours, gives lots of time to students and is a role model in the community, gives her time and money to retirement homes, gives blood regularly, and works at Big Brothers/Big Sisters that she is entitled to this television.

Ryan's having to state everything that she does to make her a good, moral person does not.