Beneficence, Reason and Sainthood

Beneficence, Reason and Sainthood
Beneficence is seen as doing good or performing charitable acts for the betterment of mankind. It consists of acts of mercy, kindness, support, assistance and charity aimed at the promotion of the good of others. Kant argues that beneficent acts cannot exist in isolation, but must have a moral aspect. It is generally accepted that no man is an island; hence every human being needs his/her fellow beings in one way or the other. Because of this interdependence nature of human beings, then everyone has a duty to others to be helpful as much as they can. According to the Encarta dictionary a duty is “something that somebody is obliged to do for moral, legal, or religious reasons”. Different theories give deferring perspectives about beneficence. According to Hume benevolence resides in human nature and therefore it forms the basis of all human morality. He argues that the manifestations of benevolence are seen in friendships, charitable acts, humility and generosity directed towards others. In the theory of utilitarianism, John Stuart Mills is of the opinion that utility forms the basis of human morals. This theory proposes that any action that produces the greatest happiness is right and vice versa. Kant believes that beneficent acts cannot be limitless but are done according to one’s means, for the sake of their happiness and that of others without hoping for anything thereby. It is human nature to seek for assistance whenever they are faced with situations that they can’t help themselves. For instance, financial assistance extended to a needy student in college, offering someone a job so that they can earn a living for self-sustenance, helping a disaster-stricken country get on its feet by other nations or nurturing the sick back to health are all acts of beneficence. This or the other, everyone has a need that can be met through a selfless act of another person and therefore anyone who finds him/herself in need will definitely require the help of another. As Kant argues in The Metaphysics of Morals “To judge by mere reason, man has no duties except to men (himself or others) …. Since in all our experience we are acquainted with no being which might be capable of obligation (active and passive) except man, man can therefore have no duty to any being other than man. And if he supposes that he has another such duty…. he is led to this misunderstanding because he confuses his duty regarding other beings with a duty toward these beings”. One good deed therefore deserves another. Duty motivates our actions and gives them a moral angle. To perform a desired action takes reason which provides a hypothetical imperative. However, moral law cannot be hypothetical but requires an unconditional statement of duty. For one to produce a moral action, then reason must be deployed, that is, the moral imperative is unconditional. Kant argues that when someone aspires to do something, then it’s imperative that they actually purpose to do it. The plan of doing or promising to do something must be unequivocally clear and with good intentions. This then becomes the categorical imperative according to Kant. The categorical has three formulations: That one should aspire to do that he/she would like to be universal law That one should act as though the maxims of his actions would be universal law by his will Treat people as an end and not as a means only.

The categorical imperatives demand that in undertaking an action, the act should be informed by intentions of good faith. One should apply himself/herself to the position of the other person that the action is intended for. The actions must pass the universality test, which is, doing to others what you wish to be done to you. There shouldn’t be any ulterior motives to an action and any subjective impulse to it negates its purpose. Wolf’s objections to Kantian moral sainthood

According to Wolf (1982) a moral saint is “a person whose every action is as…
Please