Kant: Fairness, Justice, Autonomy and Respect

Kant believes we have duties that we must follow regardless of whether it creates happiness or not. This view is irrespective of consequences. Kant's thinking seems to lead one towards concepts of justice, fairness, autonomy, and respect. Essentially, these are concepts, which are supposed to ensure everyone has their life, liberty and so forth. This seems appealing, because it is the opposite to saying that it's fine to exploit people or cause them suffering if it makes everyone else happy (a view that the utilitarian’s would uphold). 



Additionally, Kant advances the idea of a categorical imperative. Essentially, what Kant's Categorical Imperative says is 'act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it would become a universal law'. Therefore, actions are good only if they can be universalized. For example, you couldn't argue that lying become a universal law because talking is pointless if you don't do it to communicate truth, plus a rational agent is unable to logically will something that defeats their own rationality, like for example being lied to. What is essentially being advanced is the golden rule…do unto others as you would like them doing unto you.

Overall however, Kant believed that only actions that result out of one’s good will could be considered morally praiseworthy.

Recently, there was a controversy in the media regarding a jurors comment about the controversial Florida "loud music" trial where the juror says that there was no chance from the start of a murder conviction in the shooting of an unarmed teen at a gas station because several jurors were convinced Michael Dunn acted in self-defense. (more information about the case may be found at: http://abcnews.go.com/US/juror-loud-music-trial-wanted-murder-conviction/story?id=22571068). As I read further into the article, I learned that allegedly, Dunn was bothered by the loud music being played in the car that was parked next to his in a gas station and decided to ask that the people inside of the vehicle turn it down. I’d like to explore whether it was wrong for Dunn to be bothered by the loud music being played by the teenager, and nothing beyond this matter. It seems that on Kant’s view, if everyone were to go around playing his or her music too loudly, it would cause chaos in society. It seems that people would have a hard time communicating, and those that wanted peace and quiet, would not be able to attain it. This seems like a violation of someone’s autonomy, and just seems like an unfair and disrespectful action to partake in if a person does not like loud music. However, if the person playing the loud music would like this to be done to him or her, then it does not seem wrong that he engages in this behavior- as he is doing what he would like others to do to him. It seems that by Kant’s view we can say that it was not wrong for Dunn to be bothered, as someone was not doing unto him as he does unto others. Also however, it does not seem wrong that the loud music player plays his music loudly if he would like this action to be done unto him. It seems that Kant's theory runs into problems when we explore an issue like this one.