1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:08,400 Kant s ethical theory is a formal theory. This means that Kant isn t going to give us 2 00:00:08,400 --> 00:00:14,480 an objective in our life, and he isn t going to give us our rules of behaviour. For Kant 3 00:00:14,480 --> 00:00:22,200 it was very important that rules were autonomously made by every person, so you must make your 4 00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:28,840 own rules. Kant is not going to give you the rules of behaviour. He is only going to tell 5 00:00:28,840 --> 00:00:35,880 you which is the right procedure to make rules that are valid. That s why we call this theory 6 00:00:35,880 --> 00:00:45,000 a procedural ethics. Which is this procedure? How should I make my moral rules so that they 7 00:00:45,000 --> 00:00:51,760 are valid and acceptable? Kant thinks that rules are valid if they follow the categorical 8 00:00:51,760 --> 00:00:57,800 imperative, which can be stated in different ways. The categorical imperative is the rule 9 00:00:57,800 --> 00:01:07,120 to make your runs, the procedure, the way to create them. Firstly, we can state the 10 00:01:07,120 --> 00:01:15,400 categorical imperative saying this. Make rules of behaviour that you can really want to become 11 00:01:15,400 --> 00:01:25,040 a universal law. What does this mean? I must make my rules of behaviour thinking what would 12 00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:34,200 happen if everybody decided the same rules for themselves. Can I really desire that this 13 00:01:34,200 --> 00:01:43,240 happens? Is this a good situation? If the answer is yes, then the rules are valid. If 14 00:01:43,240 --> 00:01:49,960 the answer is no, then the rules are not valid. Let me give you an example. Suppose that I 15 00:01:50,200 --> 00:01:58,400 take the following rule of behaviour. I am going to lie whenever it is convenient for me. Now, 16 00:01:58,600 --> 00:02:05,040 is this rule correctly made? Have I followed the right procedure? Does this rule respect the 17 00:02:05,040 --> 00:02:13,200 categorical imperative? To know it, I must imagine what would happen if everybody decided 18 00:02:13,200 --> 00:02:23,400 the same. Can I really desire to live in a world where everybody can lie when they want? Is this 19 00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:29,840 a desirable situation? Of course not. When I say that I am going to lie whenever it is 20 00:02:29,840 --> 00:02:36,040 convenient, what I actually want is that I am going to lie when I want, but I want other 21 00:02:36,040 --> 00:02:41,640 people to tell me the truth. Because in a world where I don't know if other people are telling 22 00:02:41,760 --> 00:02:50,080 lies to me, there is no trust, and I cannot really know if other people are trustworthy. This is 23 00:02:50,080 --> 00:02:56,120 not a desirable situation. I don't really want this to be a universal rule. What I want is to 24 00:02:56,120 --> 00:03:01,640 be an exception. I am going to lie. All the rest of the people are going to tell the truth. This 25 00:03:01,640 --> 00:03:11,720 is what is forbidden in Kant's ethics. You cannot make rules for yourself that are exceptional. You 26 00:03:11,720 --> 00:03:18,600 must imagine the possibility that everyone uses them, and only if the rules can be 27 00:03:18,640 --> 00:03:29,240 universalizable, then they are correct. There is another way to express this. There is another 28 00:03:29,240 --> 00:03:39,480 way to state the categorical imperative. This other way says, make rules that respect always 29 00:03:39,520 --> 00:03:49,080 people's dignity. Actually, the second formulation is equivalent to the first. Let's see it with the 30 00:03:49,080 --> 00:03:54,400 previous example. What happens if my rule of behavior is I am going to lie whenever it is 31 00:03:54,400 --> 00:04:02,040 convenient for me? This doesn't respect human dignity. Because if I am going to lie is to take 32 00:04:02,040 --> 00:04:08,920 advantage of you. I want to manipulate you for my own benefit. This means I am not respecting your 33 00:04:08,920 --> 00:04:16,840 dignity. I am not treating you as a person. I am treating you as an instrument, as a means to obtain 34 00:04:16,840 --> 00:04:26,840 my goals, and not as an end in yourself as a person. This is what is forbidden in Kant's theory. 35 00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:31,960 You cannot make rules that treat people like instruments, because people are not instruments, 36 00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:38,840 people have dignity, and they should have been treated, they must be treated with respect. So the 37 00:04:38,840 --> 00:04:46,240 categorical imperative in both formulations gives you the same clues. Those rules that satisfy the 38 00:04:46,240 --> 00:04:52,000 categorical imperative are correct. Those that don't are not morally acceptable.