Reference no: EM132411571

Question: Immanuel Kant states that his (moral) categorical imperative is a synthetic a priori proposition. That is, a proposition that guides one to see the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience. In this case, the categorical imperative reveals the necessary conditions for moral experience. Opposed to Hume and Locke (empiricists), Kant argues that moral experience requires absolute universal reasoning that cannot relying on previous experiences or future predictions as a guide to what is and will be moral. Whereas Hume and Locke would argue that moral acts are determined by experience and their consequences on human life (an inductive form of reasoning), Kant argues that absolute deductive reasoning must be used to find the essential nature of certain intentions or maxims. For example, the maxim or intention of lying is by definition evil.

In your paper explain how Kant argues that morality must be based on his categorical imperative and universal absolute reasoning. To do this, show how Kant rejects empiricists' arguments that morality must be based human experiences and predictions. Finally, determine which position Kant's or Hume and/or Locke's view is most convincing and why; defend your analysis.

Your paper should be 4-5 pages double-spaced, normal margins.