Melissa Frater Clevis Headley Introduction to Philosophy April 19, 2013

The Light In all of us shines a light. Light in this sense is the essence of human beings; that which makes us alike. Having this light in common causes us to act in ways that benefit the whole rather than hurt it. This light has a powerful hold over our actions and has internal authority over us by guiding our behavior. It tells us what is right or wrong, what is dangerous or safe. It is an internal automatic machine that works just as efficient as lungs that breathe. Kant referred to this internal boss as morality. Kant postulated that morality whatever else it might be, is first of all a matter of reason and rationality and that the source and justification of moral principles, however we might learn them, are ultimately in ourselves. He wraps this idea into a bow and calls it autonomy; the internal force that gives us the ability to differentiate between right or wrong without appealing to external authority (Solomon et al 261). Kant believed that morality was guided by this internal authority and because it is in all of us, our actions are usually aimed at bringing benefit to the whole rather than the individual. One of his famous quotes about this idea was Always act so as to treat humanity, whether in yourself or in others, as an end in itself, never as a means. Kant reiterates his belief that because we are naturally rational and moral beings, we will act for the benefit of humanity rather than seeking to fulfill our self-interests all the time. Others have argued that humans are the opposite; we are egoists who seek to fulfill our desires even at the sake of another. This is a common fallacy of humanity and many believe that we are all self-serving. I disagree with this idea and side with Kant, because humans do act for the benefit of humanity rather than themselves because of this internal authority that guides us; the light. Some people feel that you have to be a saint or something of the sort to do good, but more importantly to do good that naturally comes from your heart or out of selflessness. But what we fail to realize is that most of our acts of goodness are not for ourselves but for the benefit of others. We are

Frater 2 naturally altruistic. Altruism can be defined as acting for the sake of other peoples interest (Solomon et al 253). For example, a young man who was known to bull children when was younger, starts to volunteer at a community center hoping to change how others view him. In this scenario, it may seem at first the young man is acting in his self-interest, wanting to change how others view, but really his is acting for the benefit of others, because it is them who he seeks to impress. Most actions can be perceived as acting in a selfish manner, when the underlying reason is for the good of others. Kant emphasizes that it is the intention of the action rather than the act itself that constitutes whether or not a person is acting for their self-interest or not. Many children go off to college in hopes of gaining a top paying job. But in most cases that is not the end goal of their intention. Most seek to give back to their families and communities; others try to find ways to change the world. On some level humans are aware of their interconnectedness and act in ways to keep that connection whole. Arnold M. Patent, author of You Can Have It All, states that every thought and feeling each of us has vibrates through the Universe, and that vibration has an impact on everything (21). It is then selfish of us to think that the good that we do is only for ourselves and has no impact on humanity as a whole. We spend most of our lives working towards certain goals that are perceived to being doing for ourselves, but reality states that we are acting for the good of others. A student goes to school to study medicine so that he can heal the world, or President Obama taking a five percent cut in pay. Both these acts display different magnitudes in which altruistic behavior exposes itself. Some will say that the President took the cut in pay so other will see him as a good President and in the end that will serve some benefit to him. It can be said that the President was led by his conscience in this act of kindness. Conscience is defined as moral rules and principles that are within us or the voice of reason it doesnt determine what we ought to do, it only reminds us of rules we have already accepted (Solomon et al 259 and 261). Because we have this internal voice guiding us at all times, our actions should tend to be moral except in cases where the voice is ignored. By giving up some of his pay, the president is showing that he cares more about the country than having money lining his pockets. Some other modern leaders have taken this same action, as they realize how much the government payroll burdens the publics pocket.

Frater 3 Others will argue that Obamas act was on of self-interest because it will help in times of re-election, but that argument is obviously refuted, since he is in his last term. It would be wise to see this as an act of humanity, an example for future presidents. Arnold Patent in You Can Have It All, states that we have created a world in which we have distorted this view of natural love, with a view of competiveness and adversity. It would not be a surprise if the American society blows Obama act of goodness, his duty, as a political strategy. Very few are aware that we humans act as not to distort the universal laws of nature. These laws are not written on a piece of paper, but are rather encoded in us. They are natural laws that are common across all societies, regardless of culture, race or religion. These laws guide us on how to treat each other. Kant states that a person will not act if they feel that their action cannot be universal across humanity. This means that if the act violates the natural laws of humanity, the person will not go through with the act. If its not possible or clearly unacceptable for everyone to act similarly, then the action in question is immoral and should not be taken (Solomon et al 261). Kant calls this test of a morals principles rationality, universalizability, that is, its capacity to be generalized for everyone, everywhere (Solomon et al 261). Kant refers to an example of a fellow who seeks to borrow money, knowing that he has no intention of paying it back. The fellow questions himself whether he should lie and say that he will pay back the money when he knows he will not. The question comes in on whether or not this action is rational, meaning, can this action be carried out in general by everyone who finds themselves in such a circumstance. The universalizability tests shows that if everyone where to borrow money under false pretense of saying that it will be paid back, because of the way ideas spread in the world, eventually no one would lend money because they know they will not get it back. People often try to act in ways that are universal to the human populous. If an act seems to violate a universal principle, in most situations that act is not taken, unless the consequences are less than the good that could be done. Referring back to Kants quote, humans often act to treat humanity as an end itself, rather than a means, because we are naturally built this way. We share a common light, which always shines bright, despite what we believe.

Frater 4 We are constantly influenced by our beliefs, and many of us fail to recognize that. In the novel Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman, the author evaluates peoples ability to recognize their biases in judgment and decision-making situations. He states that we are constantly influenced by our beliefs, and we naturally go with our first thought without taking the effort to think of a proper judgment or answer. Kahneman also states that people tend to judge other more harshly than they judge themselves, due to a lack of objectivity (Kahneman). Because of this phenomenon, we tend to perceive certain acts of goodness as being for someones self-interest, rather than a selfless act. Immanuel Kant and Arnold Patent would agree this is not true, but rather a misconception of the beliefs that we choose to believe in. Because we are rational and moral beings, we have the natural ability to do acts that are selfless and do not seek to fulfill our immediate desires, although the selfless act may be to fulfill a desire. It is not so much our actions themselves that are of moral interest (because a number of circumstance or events can interfere with them) but rather our intentions, which are completely in our control (Solomon et al 262). We have the ability to alter our view of the world and how we perceive our relation to one another. It starts with the acknowledgement that we are not separate from each other, but part of the same whole working in community and mutual support and each vibration that we make influences the whole. We should base whether an act is for humanity or against it, not by the action itself but rather the intent behind it. Stripping humans down to their base, we can find this light glowing in them, constantly wanting to make that all the other lights around it glow. We are not naturally selfish, but in certain situations we can be. A counterview to the Kantian argument would be that we are all selfish and act in our self-interest all the time without caring about others or compromising their self-interests in the process as well. This is called egoism. Egoism is the thesis that everyone always acts for his or her own advantage, that the only reason why people act respectfully or kindly toward each other for one reason or another, are to their advantage (Solomon et al 253). This bleak view of humans has imbedded itself in the world due to our beliefs. In his novel Arnold Patent writes

Frater 5 In order to create our journey into the human experience, we created the belief that we are naturally competitive and adversarial. Then we created those who reinforced that belief by encouraging us to strike out on our own and work hard to achieve personal objectives and goals. We accepted the idea that we can achieve happiness at the expense of others, or at least with about others. This reinforcement has led many of us to doubt, at least at times, that we can trust our essenceloveis who we really are (22).

Our body is a universe, what we put in there is what we get back. The same applies to our beliefs. What we believe is what we perceive, so if we have created a universe in which we believe that we are acting only for the good of ourselves and not for others, than that will be the world we perceive. But Patent states that that this is not the essence of which we really are, that we are really naturally loving beings that live in mutual support of each other. Kant also states that this is impossible because we are naturally rational and moral beings, and morality comes from within us although it transcends us. This means that morality lives within us, but above all, guides us in every action. Without thinking about it, our voice within guides us on the act we are about to commit. It tries to warn if there is danger and it pushes us towards an action that will bring good to all of humanity. We have created many systems of beliefs that have distorted such a pure view, but underneath all of the chaos, this view still holds true. It is disheartening to believe that we do not see the natural good in each other, that we really believe that we are not our brothers keeper so to say. We have come up with many convoluted ideas of what we believe reality is and the roles that each of us plays in it. Our minds have created a world in which competiveness and stepping on another are acceptable ways of satisfying our self-interests. But since we are distorted by our beliefs and have lost the true meaning of what is, it is always good to have a reminder. Kant reminds us that to be moral is to do our duty, and our duty is to do good. Not just good for ourselves but good that will benefit humanity. And in doing these good, we should not act as if it were a means to an end, but an end in itself. Meaning that we should not do good just because, we should do good because it is in us, it is a natural part of us. In a world that is filled with egoism, ethnocentrism, sexism, and racism, it is a comfort to know that these are fallacies that our mind has created and the truth is a much brighter and pleasant picture. We have managed to put humanity on the back burner, but it is still back there cooking, waiting to be brought to the front of the stove for some stirring. Our every

Frater 6 action and intention is aimed at a large number of goals some are means, others are ends. But to pretend that every action and intention can be simply defined by a single goal, either self-interest or other peoples interest, is to treat human action as utterly simple-minded (Solomon et al 256). Sometimes we have to dig deeper than the surface to find the light.

Frater 7 WORKS CITED Higgins, Kathleen , Solomon, Robert. The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy, 8th edition. Wadsworth, Canada. Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow, 1st edition. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York. Patent, Arnold M. You Can Have It All. 4th rev. edition. Celebration Publishing, Arizona.