Making Moral Decisions: What would Kant do?

Imagine you're given the following essay title: Analyse the extent to which the categorical imperative serves as a reliable foundation for moral decision making – 20 marks. Where do you start?

Take a moment, before answering the question, to consider what it is really asking. What are the key words?

Remember that there's a reason that the question has been phrased in such a way. Where possible, you should seek to reuse these key words in your answer. This is a simple method which shows the examiner you were paying attention.

If it's too difficult to use those words in your answer, ask yourself, does the argument you're making relate directly enough to the question?

The examine is not a test of pure knowledge. You need to be able to manipulate your knowledge effectively to answer the questions. The exam is in effect a type of imitation game, or, if you were asking Wittgenstein, a language game. To play the game, first, you need to understand the rules.

Once you have identified the key words, keep these in mind as you will need them later when applying the 'PEQ' technique. 'PEQ' stands for 'Point', 'Example', 'Question'; make your point, back it up with a well connected example and link it back to the question, using those very words given in the question. If you don't 'PEQ', the examiner may not understand.

As well as 'PEQing' the examiner, you need to analyse. If the question asks you to analyse, it means that you need to guide the reader to the conclusion by using analytical words. Analytical words explain to the examiner what you think of the argument.

Is the argument strong or weak, convincing or unconvincing, coherent or incoherent, valid or invalid, satisfactory or unsatisfactory, compelling or uncompelling?

If you don't explicitly tell the examiner in your answer, how do they know your thoughts? Sadly, the examiner is not a clairvoyant/e, so make it clear for them to see what you mean.

Lastly, in the question above you're asked about 'the extent to which'... Don't forget to answer this. This is an integral part of the question, failure to acknowledge its presence in your answer means you're doing yourself a disservice as this is often the key to top level answers.

If you think the argument presented suggests that the categorical imperative only partially serves as a reliable foundation for moral decision making, then make that known.

However, if you believe that the categorical imperative serves, to a great extent, as a reliable foundation for moral decision making, then again speak up about that.

Now that you've tackled the technique, let's get down to business with the plan.

There's always at least two sides to the argument... There may even be a hidden third (or fourth) angle to tackle, this is common in specific questions like this, where you can present your argument in favour of the named ethical system, then produce the counter argument. Once you've done that you may still not be satisfied with the options and this is where you can introduce the hidden third angle.

The hidden third angle is another ethical theory which you have previously studied, for example Fletcher's Situation Ethics, Aquinas' Natural Law Theory or even Humanism, say. You introduce your argument, perhaps by saying "there are others who would maintain/ A Situation Ethicist would say that discussing the categorical imperative as a reliable foundation for moral decision making isn't practical, instead we should discuss..."

You could even use this moment to borrow a well-known rhetoric from Empiricists, "it is neither true, nor false, it is meaningless." Indeed, that could offer a fourth avenue for discussion - the value of moral decision making maxims. If they are meaningless and arbitrary then need it matter which one serves as a reliable decision making device?

There you have it. The above technique is the 'close the door and open the window' style of conclusion. You close the door on one topic, that presented by the question, and leave the window open to further discussion on another topic.

#moraldecisionmaking #categoricalimperative #kantianethics #rsexamtechnique #howtodissectthequestion