Justice

Philosopher Immanuel Kant offers an alternative to the utilitarian and libertarian views of rights. In Kant’s view, our rights derive from “the idea that we are rational beings, worthy of dignity and respect” (103).Of the three approaches to justice discussed in Chapter 1, Kant is a proponent of the second approach: connecting “justice and morality to freedom” (106). He has a different idea of freedom, however. Freedom of choice does not include anything “biologically determined or socially conditioned” (108). Acting freely means acting “autonomously,” not “according to the dictates of nature or social convention” (108).

Kant rejects utilitarianism on the ground that it “leaves rights vulnerable” by relying on a calculation of the greatest happiness (106). He also argues that what the majority values is not necessarily just. Empirical calculations are also too variable to support universal principles. Essentially, “basing moral principles on preferences and desires–even the desire for happiness–misunderstands what morality is about” (106).

Kant also rejects religion as the basis for morality. Instead, he argues for “reason” as its basis (106). Because all human beings have the capacity for reason, we have the capacity for freedom, as he defines it. Kant refers to the opposite of acting freely as “heteronomy”; that is, acting according to determinations outside of oneself (109).