Youth Violence

Problems with Kant

Throughout Immanuel Kant's works, he has kept the common theme, "Treat others as you would treat yourself. Always as an end and never as a means"(131, EMP). I find this ultimate moral principle somewhat contradictory to his other moral or theories. Issues that I find problematic with this ultimate moral principle are the punishments of criminals and the mentally as well as physically ill people. The last problem I have with Kantian Ethics is its relation to society in 21st century.

First I'll start with Kant on punishment. Kant says that when a criminal commits an act against another person, we as a law-abiding body, should only punish him proportionately to the crime he/she has committed. But what if the criminal committed an act of rape? Would the proportionate punishment be raping him back? If this is the case then it contradicts his principle that "we must strive to promote their welfare, respect their rights and avoid harming them."(132 EMP). How can we avoid harming a criminal when Kant's theory of punishment says that we should punish a person proportionately to the harm he places upon another person? I agree that we should punish the criminal proportionately to the crime committed, but as far as his principle on avoiding harming others, there should be some limits to how far that extends. If it's a law abiding citizen then I can see where we should keep them from being in harm's way but if the person is a criminal then where do we set our limits?

My second issue has to deal with punishing the mentally ill. Kant compares mentally ill persons to animals, meaning that they lack reasoning capabilities all the same and so to treat them as rational beings just wouldn't make sense. He mentions that we must use a reward and punishment system in hopes they will learn what is acceptable behavior and what is not (139 EMP). But wouldn't that mean that after a while they would learn the reason why they're being punished or rewarded because he would then be trained to know better? He also says that its absurd to hold a mentally ill person accountable for their actions since they are not in control of themselves but then he goes on to say we should hold them responsible for their actions because all humans are rational beings and animals are not. It's obvious to see here where Kant contradicts himself and creates confusion not only to myself but possibly to others as well.

My last issue about Kantian ethics is being able to relate it to the 21st century. Over the years, the United States democratic society has changed dramatically since Kant first wrote on ethics. People have statuses these days dealing with race, economic, and religion. I still agree with Kant's