Kantian Ethics: The Principle of Universalizability

Kantian Ethics: The Principle of Universalizability Student Name Institution Affiliation Since the very dawn of time, the challenges in determining wrong and right actions have been considered by many great philosophers. Emmanuel Kant holds the view that humans are free beings who should not be tied to the outcomes of their actions. Kant’s view is guided by the principle of Morality that gives an ethical obligation to human beings in their deeds. The principle of universalizability, according to wood (2017), holds the same view. However, universalizability, as a construct of Kantian ethics goes further and outlines that actions by human beings are out of their control, and should not be used to judge them. Therefore, human beings are to be guided by intuition to do what is right in consideration of others. For instance, it would be wrong, according to Kantian ethics for a country to give false data on its economy in spite of the benefits it may reap from the international community. According to Universalizability theory, Categorical imperative is key in any action. Wood (2017) says that we should act in ways that we would wish everyone else to adopt. For the action to satisfy the categorical imperative principle, it must be consistent and acceptable to rational beings across the world. In this regard, stealing from one person to help another person would be violating this principle. Stealing, according to Turner, and Chambers (2006), is wrong, and when you steal from one person to help another person, the person you have stolen from will react negatively while the person you helped may welcome the action. This inconsistency violates the principle of Universalizability. Acceptability is another key factor for any action to be universally considered right or wrong. Heinz Dilemma justifies such actions. Some actions that can be consistently received well by the whole world but are not right For instance, Heinz would be supported by the world for stealing the drug to save his wife but would be imprisoned for breaking moral laws (Turner, & Chambers, 2006). Helping others for personal g...