Kant vs Bhagavad-Gita
This free essay Kant vs Bhagavad-Gita
. If you do not find your term paper, you can search our essay database for other topics on the search page essays.
Words: 715 | Pages: 3
Kant vs. Bhagavad–Gita
There is a broad range of ethical beliefs. Of course, in ethics it is a matter of opinion of how people make decisions on a daily basis. I am going to be discussing Kant and Bhagavad-Gita's deontic ethics and their morality in terms of duty. Both have a wide range of similarities and differences.
From Kant's perspective he teaches us that to have moral worth, an action must stem from duty. It is the intention of obeying the duty that counts, not the consequences. In Kant's theory there are two law's, ethical law which is following the duty of god and judicial law which is following the duty of nature – we should always try to obey both but when it comes down to it we need to follow the ethical law. Kant said that we should always follow god's law over man. According to Kant, what is singular about motivation by duty is that it consists of bare respect for lawfulness. Only a universal law could be the content of a requirement that has the reason-giving force of morality. Kant also believes that every human being is born with good will. Kant points out that a good will must then also be good in itself and not in virtue of its relationship to other things such as the agent's own happiness or overall welfare.
In the Bhagavad-Gita, they tell us that we are basically stuck here on earth by ego, and it is our moral duty to do for god and it will set you free. There are a couple of performed actions spoken of in class, action in sacrifice and action of duty. Action in sacrifice is often performed, but it needs to be for a good cause and action of duty has to be performed, and this would be to release the fruit of the action to the lord and we should offer ourselves and not look for a reward. Bhagavad-Gita tells us to offer our self and do not look for a reward. No matter what decisions we make or the lack there of, nature will put us into wherever we were meant to be. When people begin to follow the duty of another it is where we go wrong. One should hand over ourselves to another human being. They also tell us that god is attained by performing the actions of god not law.
Between the two books of Kant and Bhagavad-Gita, there are both similarities and differences between each other. Kant like The Bhagavad-Gita strongly believed in doing actions because it was your duty to act, and it was morally acceptable. Both of the books fell under the category of being deontic ethics because they learned what their duties are in life. I personally do not agree with either of the two because they seem contradicting to me. If we were to follow the Hinduism ethics then it would seem that most people would be stuck here forever because there are many things materialistic wise that are keeping most of the population earth bound.
The differences between the two books was that in the Bhagavad-Gita there was no right or wrong, it solely depended on your action to show what was right or wrong. In Kant's theory, you were either right or wrong universally. There were no difference in consequence with Kant, it did not matter if you were someone of power or someone with the lack of power, and it was either the right way or the wrong way. They also differ in terms of religion. With Kant, he believes that you have to make the decision to act and no one can make it for you. With Bhagavad-Gita, they believe that you must love god, always obey him and every action you do will be moral and towards the divine.
In reading these two books, I have learned with each individual religion there will always be beliefs that possibly will not be followed by others and what may be right here, may not be right from their point of view.