Exam prep: short answer questions.

2021 Question Paper
(There were no exams in 2021 but exam paper resources were made available.)

Award 1 mark for any of the following points.

• there is a contradiction in the will when it is not possible for a rational being to will that their maxim be universalised* (1 mark)
• in order to pursue my own happiness, which is central to my interest as a free rational agent, I will need to make use of the talents of other people (1 mark)
• for example, I cannot will that my maxim, ‘it is ok for me not to develop my talents’ is universalised as I cannot rationally will that no-one ever developed their talents (1 mark)
• so my willing that no-one will ever develop their talents undermines my pursuit of my own happiness** (1 mark)
• an imperfect duty arises from a contradiction in the will. (1 mark)

Any other relevant point.

[Personal note:
* this doesn't capture the difference between a contradiction in conception and a contradiction in the will. In both cases it is not possible for a rational being to will that their maxim be universalised but it is for different reasons. It needs to say something like, "although it is possible for the maxim to be a universal law of nature, it is impossible to will that it be so. For a will that brought that about would conflict with itself." 
** This explanation of why we have an imperfect duty to develop our talents may work but it isn't what Kant said. Kant said "as a rational being, he necessarily wills that all his abilities should be developed, because they serve him and are given to him for all sorts of possible purposes." Kant doesn't make reference to needing to make use of the talents of others. You would still have an imperfect duty to develop your talents even if you were living alone on a desert island.]

• we have a perfect duty to refrain from following maxims that lead to a contradiction in conception when universalised (1 mark)
• we have an imperfect duty to refrain from following maxims that lead to a contradiction in the will when universalised (1 mark)
• we must always follow our perfect duties (1 mark)
• we must sometimes follow our imperfect duties/develop a policy about when it is ok not to follow our imperfect duties*. (1 mark)

[* Personal note: I am assuming the 'develop a policy' is an allusion to the more rigourist interpretation of imperfect duties. See here. I am not aware of Kant anywhere saying specifically that we must 'develop a policy' about our imperfect duties.]

Award 1 mark for any of the following points.

• although Kant tells us that we must sometimes follow our imperfect duties, he doesn’t tell us when we must follow them (1 mark)
• opportunities to help others/develop our talents, come around much more often than opportunities to lie, cheat, steal and kill, so if we can’t clearly determine when we must follow our imperfect duties then Kant’s theory seems incomplete and/or unhelpful (1 mark)
• he says we should make a policy* that will tell us when it is ok not to follow our imperfect duties (1 mark), but this seems to come down to inclination, circumstances, etc, which Kant said are morally irrelevant** (1 mark)
• Kant’s concept of imperfect duties is useful in making moral decisions as it reminds us that although we need not develop our talents or help others all the time, we do have duties to do these things sometimes (1 mark)
• were it not for the concept of imperfect duties Kant’s theory would be an entirely negative one that told us only about the things we were not allowed to do (1 mark)
• the concept of imperfect duties gives us moral cause to prevent moral agents from being cold and detached. (1 mark)

Any other relevant point.

[Personal note: * See above. **I am unclear why this is a problem. The duty is to fulfil the imperfect duty to some extent some of the time. That inclination or circumstance determine the 'when' and 'how much' does not mean they are contributing to the moral value contrary to what Kant says elsewhere.]

Course Specification 'Typical Questions'.

The Higher Course Specification contains a list of 'typical questions'. There are no marking instructions associated with these questions so, to assist with revision and exam preparation, I have prepared some marking instructions of my own. You should remember these have no official standing. 

Any three substantive points

• It is the claim that reason should be used to criticize all our beliefs.
• Can be contrasted with the earlier belief that there were 'truths above reason' especially religious beliefs.
• Kant believed it was possible to use reason and logic to work out the right thing to do — a method known as the categorical imperative.
• It is exemplified in Kant's rejection of contradictions in conception and willing as a rational system would be free of contradictions.

 

Kant says that the good will

• Is the only thing that is good without qualification.
• Is good in all circumstances and does not depend on anything else for its goodness.
• Other things may be good in all sorts of ways but they are not always good and without a good will they can become extremely bad,
• e.g. bravery might lead a criminal to be more audacious.

 

• For an action to have genuine moral worth it must be done from duty not from self-interest or inclination.
• Kant distinguishes acting according to duty and acting out of duty,
• e.g. the example of a tradesman who treats all his customers fairly but does so out of self-interest so, according to Kant, is not morally praiseworthy.
• e.g. the person who is in such a bad way that they don't want to go on living but carries on, not from fear or inclination but from duty, then their actions do have moral content.

 

It is difficult to know how much weight to put on the plural 'examples' as one example with two possible options will often do the job.

• 'So act as to treat humanity, both in your own person, and in the person of every other, always at the same time as an end, never simply as a means.'
• Treating someone 'simply as a means' is failing to contribute to the goal or purpose of that person.
• Kant gives the example of suicide as a way of treating yourself as a means only.
• Kant gives the example of false promising as a way of treating others as a means only.

 

• A maxim is the subjective principle of your action. It can be thought of as the supposed rule that you are acting on and may be good or bad.
• To determine whether a maxim is good or bad you have to see if it is logically possible to imagine everyone following that rule. This thought experiment is the process of universalising the maxim.
• It may be impossible to universalise a maxim as attempting to do so will result in a 'contradiction in conception',
• This is a situation where attempting to universalise the maxim removes the conditions necessary for the maxim to exist,
• e.g. 'make a false promise' cannot be universalised as if everyone made false promises it would undermine the whole notion of what a promise meant.
• It may be impossible to universalise a maxim as attempting to do so will result in a 'contradiction in the will',
• This is where you can imagine a world where everyone followed the maxim but it would not be a world you could rationally will because it would be a world where you would no longer be able to will things that you would rationally need to will.
• e.g. 'don't help the needy' when universalised would result in you willing a world where you couldn't receive help when in need.

 

• A theory that says the right thing to do is determined by your duty rather than by something else such as consequences.

Short answer questions from earlier versions of Higher Philosophy

In earlier versions of the Higher Philosophy there was no paper dedicated to short answer questions. There were, however a number of short answer questions included over the years.

Some caution needs to be exercised when using these questions as expectations may have been different. This is particularly so with questions dating from some years back. In addition, from 2019, short answer questions will receive a maximum of six marks per question.

Within limits it is entirely possible that essentially the same question can be awarded different marks in different years. Where there is more to say it is possible to allocate more or less marks and so adjust the difficulty of the question. Question setters may do this to adjust the overall difficulty of a paper. You should always check the number of marks allocated to a question and to offer at least that number of discrete points to the marker unless the question specifically tells you to do otherwise.

Having said that all that, past short answer questions can still provide some idea of what kinds of questions might be asked.

 

 

• 1 mark for linking 'deontological' to the ethical position that morality is based on duty/obligation/it is a moral theory where morality is determined by something intrinsic to the action rather than the consequences. It is not enough to say it is to do with motives. 

 

• 1 mark for "Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
• 1 mark for "So act as to treat humanity, both in your own person, and in the person of every other, always at the same time as an end, never simply as a means.
• 1 mark for "Act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends."

Due to there being different translations it is not necessary for the wording to be exactly as given here but it should be close enough to capture the important features of the formulation. In particular: - the first formulation concerns what we can logically will to be the case not what we would wish or desire to be the case or what we might successfully get people to follow; - in the second formulation (the humanity/end in itself formulation) it is not acceptable to say, "You shouldn't treat someone as a means" the crucial point is that they must always be treated as an end. 

 

• 1 mark for saying that you cannot conceive of a maxim becoming a universal law because the attempt to do so removes the conditions which make it possible 

 

• 1 mark for saying that a perfect duty is one that has no exceptions. A candidate may say that in Kantian ethics if attempting to universalise the maxim leads to a contradiction in conception then we have a perfect duty to refrain from acting on that maxim. 

 

• In Kant's philosophy this is a contradiction which some impermissible maxims are guilty of because, although they are possible to conceive, they are inconsistent with other maxims which any rational person would wish to assent to at some point. 

 

• Conflicting duties issue not resolved
• We have natural inclination to consider consequences in moral decision making
• Role of emotion is downplayed in favour of duty

 

 

 

 

 

 

◀ Previous

Contents

Next ▶