Yol Ayrımı mı, Yol Arkadaşlığı mı?: Kant Etiğinde Erdem Kavramı
Rahime Çetinİyi bir yaşamın nasıl mümkün olabileceğinin erdemle açıklanması, erdemin insan yaşamındaki önemini göstermektedir. Dolayısıyla insan fenomenlerini konu alan felsefede geniş bir yer tutan erdem kavramı özellikle etik alanında önemli bir araştırma konusudur. Etiğin tarihi geçmişinde, etik sorunlara kararmayan bir ışık tutmuş olan Kant’ın etik görüşüne genel olarak bakıldığında, erdem kavramının pek ön planda olmadığı görülmektedir. Bununla birlikte, Kant’ın erdem ile ilgili söyledikleri, erdemin ahlak yasasından daha az önemli olmadığını göstermektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Kant’ın erdem temelli bir etik kurmadığı için klasik bir erdem etikçisi olmadığı veya etiğinde erdemin yerini ve önemini göstererek bir erdem etikçisi olduğu tartışmasının pek de anlamlı olmadığını göstermektir. Çünkü bu tartışma, Kant etiğini bir yere taşımaz. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, Kant’ı, bir erdem etikçisi olduğu ya da olmadığı tartışmasına sokarak kategorize etmeden, Kant etiğinde erdemin yeri ve önemini ortaya koymak amacıyla, Ahlak Metafiziği adlı eserinin Erdem Öğretisi bölümünde yapılan erdem tanımlamaları ve açıklamaları ile “en yüksek iyi” (summum bonum) kavramı ve erdem ödevleri ele alınacaktır.
Kantian Relationship between “Moral Law” and Virtue: Separation or Companionship
Rahime ÇetinTime and again, virtue has been explained as the principal factor behind a good human life. “Virtue,” as a chosen way of living or as a human trait, is an important research subject. In the history of ethical philosophy, Kant has been an influential figure, who has elucidated many ethical dilemmas. His conception of ethics was built on a set of universally applicable moral principles that were based on the guiding belief of practical rationality, or “Categorical Imperative,” and “virtue” isnot seen as an inherent quality of human nature. This study will attempt to show that both sides of the arguments purport to establish that Kant is not a classical virtue ethicist because he does not establish a virtue-based ethics or that he is a virtue ethicist since virtue has an important place in his ethics and has flaws. In accordance with this purpose, the definitions, expressions, and the concept of the “highest good” (summum bonum) and the duties of virtue with respect to the concept, as found in the Doctrine of Virtue (a chapter in The Metaphysics of Morals), will be discussed to arrive at a clearer understanding of the significance and status of the notion of virtue.
In this study, the concept of virtue, which has a significant place in philosophy, especially in the field of ethics, is addressed within the context of Kantian ethics. To arrive at a better understanding of the concept of “virtue,” Kant’s universally valid framework will be examined. His definitions of virtue and duties of virtue and their connections with moral law, good, and happiness, which are the main determining concepts of Kantian ethics, are explained. This study examines Kant’s definitions of virtue, its relationship with moral law, and its place and importance in his theories. Kant defined “virtue” as the strength of a rational will to act according to one’s sense of duty. This strength stems from the moral law of practical rationality. To counter Kant’s argument, it can be said that humans are not just rational beings but have feelings, and virtuous acts are thus limited by individual dispositions and emotions. Therefore, humans can act virtuously, to the extent that they stand against their desires and dispositions. In other words, one can resist one’s own desires and inclinations through the moral strength of one’s own will. Therefore, virtue is the moral capability and perfection of a man. After analyzing the concept of virtue in Kantian ethics, it is evaluated from different perspectives. Considered objectively, virtue cannot be universalized or individually realized throughout one’s life, as Kant had proposed, because human beings are not only driven by pure reason, but also by feelings and impulses. However, this does not mean that complete virtue can never be attained universally. Considered subjectively, virtue is one’s determination to continually cultivate and develop moral maxims. Following the above arguments against Kantian virtue in relation to his concepts of the “highest good” will be explained as the result of virtue and happiness. The fact that the principle of virtue (moral principle) and the principle of happiness come from different sources does not mean that they are contradictory notions. According to Kant, the worthiness of being happy is a moral condition. Virtue refers to the worthiness of being happy. Therefore, virtue and happiness can help achieve the highest good. In the next section, the duties of virtue in Kantian ethics are investigated by scrutinizing Kant’s classification of these duties. Similar to Kant’s understanding of duty, the duties of virtue are divided into two groups: “duties to oneself” and “duties to others.” These duties are broadly about one’s own perfection and the happiness of others. The duties of “one’s own perfection” are “natural perfection” and “cultivation of morality.” The powers one has as potential for the realization of their natural perfection are the powers of the spirit, mind, and body. The “happiness of others,” which is the duty of virtue, consists of “natural welfare” and “moral well-being.” “Natural welfare” is based on benevolence andmoral well-being, which is a duty to others. This is a negative (limiting) duty. In other words, it is our duty to promote others’ happiness through moral well-being. The fundamental principle on which these duties are based is the intrinsic dignity of every human being. Kant elucidated these duties through examples. In conclusion, although the notion ofvirtue is not the basis of Kant’s ethics, further investigation shows that virtue has decisive importance in his theory ofethics. This study has presented the place and importance of virtue in Kantian ethics without categorizing it as either virtue ethics or not.
