Plato vs. Kant: Comparing Classical and Formal Ethics

Reason and the Control of Human Concupiscence

The rule of reason produces prudence, which enables control over the irascible (fortitude) and the concupiscence (temperance). Kant also sets up an opposition between impulses and reason. He views any action resulting in pleasure as suspect; for Kant, the high cost of our behavior is a sign of its moral worth.

Key Differences Between Plato and Kant

• 1. Ethics and Politics: In Plato, ethics is subordinate to politics. For the Greek philosopher, correct behavior is not what is good in the abstract, but what is good for the polis. Virtues are divided by class: wisdom for rulers, fortitude and temperance for guards and workers. Each person fits a role within the state. Plato adopted the "political lie" (myth of the three metals) in the Republic, while Kant views the lie as unethical behavior.
• 2. Formal vs. Material Ethics: Kant's ethics is formal, while Plato's is material. Kantian ethics does not dictate specific content or tell one exactly what to do. By contrast, Plato's ethics establishes a set of virtues (prudence, fortitude, and temperance), thereby asserting specific moral content.

Philosophical Definitions

• Maxims: These are main practices described as subjective principles that conduct behavior under specific circumstances. Maxims can be good or bad.
• Imperatives: These are objective practical principles. They have a constrictive character; when reason seeks knowledge of reality, it leads to policies or laws. When reason directs conduct, it issues mandates. Kant calls these practical principles because they are laws of action. They are objective as they seek to serve every rational subject, differentiating them from subjective maxims.
• Empirical Self: The self as offered by experience, constituted by phenomenal reality, psychic life, and bodies subjected to time and space.
• Transcendent I: The self as the ultimate condition for the possibility of synthesizing all knowledge, shown in moral experience. While there is no scientific knowledge of it, Kant posits its existence through reflection on the possibility of knowledge.