Argument Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Argument - Essay Example For example, CI requires that a rational individual is moral if the end of their actions is to promote the good of all. Therefore, CI is the best theory in precisely articulating human reasoning and decision making, and relating these to free human will compared to other decision theories. Moral actions are indicative of rationality, with an immoral action indicating irrationality in an individual. A moral action has to be universal in that it has to stand true in any event anywhere. For example, stealing is immoral; it causes pain to the owner while it may result to pleasure in the one stealing. Causing pain is immoral as it leads to suffering, implying that such an act when committed by a rational being would be immoral. Stealing is thus a crime universally as it violates CI theory, which is a universal law of morals. Being a universal law, Kantian CI becomes the best theory that explains why individuals have to decide in a certain way. For example, considering the relational Diale cts theory in a similar case, the theory requires us to consider issues around us, which help people to construct meaning in any relation. Thus the theory is based on specific circumstances as it requires one to consider cultural and social rational systems. This implies the theory applies to multicultural diversity (Turner, 2004). Thus stealing according to this theory may be justified in some cases as it directs people to construct certain meanings in a specific setting of relationships. On the other hand, the how we decide theory is largely based on observable behavior from outside as one cannot access the mind of the individual. For example, asking why does a an individual steal would lead to detailed examinations of their behaviors and history in finding elements that may explain such behaviors in deciding if the individual is actually on the wrong. Such an observation may sometimes be inaccurate and may lead to a wrong conclusion. Therefore, the advantage of CI theory is that it is based on a universal law and is not relative as the other two theories, which depend on specific circumstances. The issue of personal freedom in making a decision is of much importance, and precisely bestows the responsibility of an action on the particular individual. As Kant’s CI theory explains, freedom is an important element in reasoning, whose function cannot be ignored. Thus, without assuming freedom, an individual cannot act (McCormick, 2005). In other words, an individual is not a robot or causal agent that only serves to implement orders. Thinking in such direction would deny humanity its own existence and purpose. Freedom is thus a central focus in decision making and reasoning; an individual is at will to decide in any direction. In this theory, Kant places the consequence of each action on the specific individual, and not on a system of events that may be explained to be the causal agents behind such an action. However, considering the how we decide theory, the major limitation is the assumption that humans are not rational. Thus, the theory traces human action not from the specific individual, but from a system of factors and history that plays to shape and define human actions. This would relegate humanity to being a causal agent that is not responsible for