Comprehension
Analyse the following passage and provide an appropriate answer for the questions that follow.

One key element of Kantian ethics is the idea that the moral worth of any action relies entirely on the motivation of the agent: human behaviour cannot be said good or bad in light of the consequences it generates, but only with regard to what moved the agent to act in that particular way. Kant introduces the key concept of duty to clarify the rationale underpinning of his moral theory, by analysing different types of motivation. First of all, individuals commit actions that are really undertaken for the sake of duty itself, which is, done because the agent thinks they are the right thing to do. No consideration of purpose of the action matters, but only whether the action respects a universal moral law. Another form of action (motivation) originates from immediate inclination: Everyone has some inclinations, such as to preserve one's life, or to preserve honour. These are also duties that have worth in their own sake. But acting according to the maxim that these inclinations might suggest, such as taking care of one's own health - lacks for Kant true moral worth. For example, a charitable person who donates some goods to poor people might do it following her inclination to help the others - that is, because she enjoys helping the others. Kant does not consider it as moral motivation, even if the action is in conformity with duty. The person acting from duty would in fact do it to the other because she recognizes that helping the others is her moral obligation. Final type of motivation suggested by Kant include actions that can be done in conformity with duty, yet are not done from duty, but rather as a mean to some further end. In order to illustrate this type of motivation, Kant provides the following example. A shopkeeper who does not overcharge the inexperienced customer and treats all customers in the same way certainly is doing the right thing - that is, acts in conformity with duty - but we cannot say for sure that he is acting in this way because he is moved by the basic principles of honesty: “It is his advantage that requires it”. Moreover, we cannot say that he is moved by an immediate inclination toward his customers since he gives no preference to one with respect to another. Therefore, concludes Kant, “his action was done neither from duty nor from immediate inclination but merely for purposes of self-interest”.
Question: 1

Consider the following examples: 
(i) Red Cross volunteer who donates blood every year to thank an anonymous donor who saved the life of his mother some time back 
(ii) A voluntary organization which conducts regular blood donation camps to improve its legitimacy. As per the passage, correct statement(s) related to the above examples would be: I. The source of motivation for both examples is same 
II. Individuals may commit actions for reasons beyond duty 
III. Both examples illustrate the concept of moral worth

Show Hint

Always check whether the action is done purely out of duty or due to external inclinations. Kantian ethics distinguishes between “duty” and “inclination,” and only the former has true moral worth.
Updated On: Dec 4, 2025
  • Option I only
  • Option II only
  • Options I & II
  • Option III only
  • Options II & III
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Recall the key idea from the passage.
According to the passage, real moral worth comes only when actions are done purely out of duty, not because of gratitude, benefit, or any ulterior motive.
Step 2: Analyze example (i).
The Red Cross volunteer donates blood yearly to thank the anonymous donor who saved his mother. This is motivated by personal gratitude, not moral duty.
Step 3: Analyze example (ii).
The voluntary organization conducts blood donation camps not as a sense of duty but to enhance its own legitimacy and reputation. Again, this is a motive beyond duty.
Step 4: Match with the statements.
- I. “Source of motivation for both examples is same.” → Correct, since both are motivated by reasons beyond duty (gratitude or legitimacy). ✓
- II. “Individuals may commit actions for reasons beyond duty.” → Correct, both examples illustrate this. ✓
- III. “Both illustrate moral worth.” → Wrong, because they lack Kantian moral worth since they are not duty-driven. ✗ Step 5: Conclude.
Hence, the correct set of statements is I and II. \[ \boxed{\text{Options I & II (C)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

Which of the following inferences would be against the ideas in the passage? I. Kantian ethics considers the moral worth of an inclination on the basis of its consequence.
II. Actions motivated by the inclination of an individual lacks moral worth.
III. Elements of moral obligation reduce the moral worth of a duty, which has some worth in itself.

Show Hint

When tackling inference questions, always distinguish between what is explicitly supported by the passage versus what contradicts it. Here, Kant rejects consequentialism, so anything linking moral worth to outcomes is automatically incorrect.
Updated On: Dec 4, 2025
  • Option I only
  • Options I & II
  • Options II only
  • Options III only
  • Options I & III
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Recall Kant’s idea from the passage.
Kant argues that acting from an inclination (gratitude, benefit, happiness) has no moral worth. Only actions performed from a sense of moral duty possess true worth.
Step 2: Examine each inference.
- I. “Kantian ethics considers the moral worth of inclination on the basis of consequence.” → This is against Kant, because he rejects consequentialism and bases moral worth on duty, not outcomes. ✗ → This is the incorrect inference.
- II. “Actions motivated by inclination lack moral worth.” → This is exactly what Kant says. ✓ Correct idea, not against passage.
- III. “Elements of moral obligation reduce the moral worth of a duty.” → Wrong, since moral obligation is the only basis of moral worth. Kant never claims it reduces worth. ✓ Correct idea, not against passage.
Step 3: Conclude.
The only inference which contradicts Kant’s philosophy is I. \[ \boxed{\text{Option I only (A)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

View More Questions

Questions Asked in XAT exam

View More Questions