Immanuel Kant's Moral Freedom

Question

Kant resorted to presupposing freedom when participating in the moral world. However, which do you prefer, the idea that we are free (spontaneity of everything) or the idea that we are not free (mechanical series of cause and effect), and how will your idea influence the moral decisions that you will eventually make in the future?

Answer 1

So this is obviously a pretty big question, one that requires an entire essay to give a brief answer to, and a book to give a developed response!

But to gesture at a brief response... First I would note that Kant doesn't exactly presuppose the idea of freedom, so much as say that IF we are to give moral evaluations at all then it must be that those actions are those of free agents. This is what's called a Transcendental argument.

In the Critique of Pure Reason Kant argues that IF we are to have cognition of external objects, then our judgments must use concepts from the understanding that conform to the Pure Categories of Understanding and apply those concepts to Sensible Intuitions that are molded by the Forms of Pure Intuition (space & time) etc. blah blah... This is his transcendental argument about what's required for cognition of objections—he's giving the necessary preconditions for its possibility.

In his practical philosophy, he's making a similar transcendental argument about what's required for Free, and thus responsible and morally evaluable, action.

All that said, I don't know whether you prefer thinking of yourself as a free agent or fatalistically as having your actions determined, that's up to you. Should one prefer one or the other? I think there are compelling reasons to prefer the former. But there's also the issue of what you think is true versus what you prefer or hope is true. I think the question is asking for your opinion on the second option.

I hope all this helps!