In the article titled. Moral Self-knowledge in Kantian Ethics. Emer O’Hagan discusses Kant’s positions and thoughts refering self-knowledge and the function it plays in responsibility and virtuous action. O’Hagan first introduces a cardinal characteristic of Kant’s ethical theory which is its acknowledgment of the psychological complexness of human existences. O’Hagan uses this acknowledgment of psychological complexness by Kant to plunge into Kant’s experiencing on self-knowledge.
Once a basic apprehension of Kant’s attitude towards self-knowledge has been established. O’Hagan so uses Kant’s ethical theory to demo how self-knowledge can be used as a agency to assist find the goodness of an action. The statements presented by O’Hagan are logical and clearly supported and verified through the presented grounds. Kant is shown to hold recognized the psychological complexness of the human being in acknowledging that. “judgments refering the rightness of actions are vulnerable to corruptness from self-interested inclination” ( O’Hagan 525-537 ) .
Kant is stating that that even though an action may get down out as from responsibility. our internal feelings as human existences can make a good terminal as a agency for the action. therefore rendering it non from responsibility. Kant besides recognizes that our ain judgements about us may non be accurate. Moral self-development is a pattern to develop truth for our self-judgments and takes into consideration one’s motivations for action. O’Hagan tells us that this moral pattern requires moral self-knowledge which is a signifier of self-awareness disciplined by regard for liberty. the theoretical foundation of Kantian moralss.
Harmonizing to Kant. the first bid of the responsibilities to oneself as a moral being is self-knowledge. This is the ability to cognize yourself in footings of whether your bosom is for good or evil and whether your actions are pure or impure. Kant describes responsibilities of virtuousness to be broad responsibilities. in that there is non a clear criterion for how one should travel about executing action for an terminal that is besides a responsibility. O’Hagan tells us that Kant’s responsibility of moral self-knowledge is the responsibility to cognize one’s ain bosom.
Kant tells us that moral self-knowledge is rather hard because it involves abstracting. or taking a non-biased analysis of one’s ego. Because we are bound to our ain feelings and dispositions. we can non wholly separate ourselves from our ain prejudice. The power of self-knowledge is the power to see things in objectiveness alternatively of subjectiveness. The concluding measure of the statement is associating self-knowledge to finding the goodness of an action. O’Hagan tells us that developing self-knowledge will develop one’s self-understanding and will develop guards against self-deceit.
Using these accomplishments to truly understand one’s bosom allows for one to cognize one’s motivations. and therefore practical stance in action. Harmonizing to Kant. the goodness of an action is determined by one’s motivations. so the goodness of one’s action can now be evaluated. O’Hagan clearly demonstrates the importance of self-knowledge in Kant’s theory of moralss and validates its importance by depicting application for usage of the pattern of self-knowledge ( O’Hagan 525-537 ) .