Editing Autonomy (section)

=== According to Kant ===
[[Immanuel Kant]] (1724–1804) defined autonomy by three themes regarding [[contemporary ethics]]. Firstly, autonomy as the right for one to make their own decisions excluding any interference from others. Secondly, autonomy as the capacity to make such decisions through one's own independence of mind and after personal reflection. Thirdly, as an ideal way of living life autonomously. In summary, autonomy is the [[Moral rights|moral right]] one possesses, or the capacity we have in order to think and make decisions for oneself providing some degree of control or power over the events that unfold within one's everyday life.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HlJ8BbjLXSAC&q=philosophy+and+autonomy+and+kant|title=Kant on Moral Autonomy|last=Sensen|first=Oliver|date=2013|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1107004863}}</ref>

The context in which Kant addresses autonomy is in regards to [[moral theory]], asking both foundational and abstract questions. He believed that in order for there to be [[morality]], there must be autonomy. "Autonomous" is derived from the Greek word ''autonomos'' <ref>Oxford English Dictionary</ref> where 'auto' means self and 'nomos' means to govern (''nomos'': as can be seen in its usage in ''nomárchēs'' which means chief of the province). Kantian autonomy also provides a sense of [[Rationality|rational]] autonomy, simply meaning one rationally possesses the [[motivation]] to govern their own life. Rational autonomy entails making your own decisions but it cannot be done solely in [[Social isolation|isolation]]. Cooperative rational interactions are required to both develop and exercise our [[ability]] to live in a world with others.

Kant argued that morality presupposes this autonomy ({{langx|de|Autonomie}}) in moral agents, since moral requirements are expressed in [[categorical imperative]]s. An imperative is categorical if it issues a valid command independent of personal desires or interests that would provide a reason for obeying the command. It is hypothetical if the validity of its command, if the reason why one can be expected to obey it, is the fact that one desires or is interested in something further that obedience to the command would entail. "Don't speed on the freeway if you don't want to be stopped by the police" is a hypothetical imperative. "It is wrong to break the law, so don't speed on the freeway" is a categorical imperative. The hypothetical command not to speed on the freeway is not valid for you if you do not care whether you are stopped by the police. The categorical command is valid for you either way. Autonomous moral agents can be expected to obey the command of a categorical imperative even if they lack a personal desire or interest in doing so. It remains an open question whether they will, however.

The Kantian concept of autonomy is often misconstrued, leaving out the important point about the autonomous agent's self-subjection to the moral law. It is thought that autonomy is fully explained as the ability to obey a categorical command independently of a personal desire or interest in doing so—or worse, that autonomy is "obeying" a categorical command independently of a natural desire or interest; and that [[heteronomy]], its opposite, is acting instead on personal motives of the kind referenced in hypothetical imperatives.

In his ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals]]'', Kant applied the concept of autonomy also to define the concept of personhood and human [[dignity]]. Autonomy, along with [[rationality]], are seen by Kant as the two criteria for a meaningful life. Kant would consider a life lived without these not worth living; it would be a life of value equal to that of a plant or insect.<ref name="Shafer-Landau, Russ 2010 Pp161">Shafer-Landau, Russ. "The fundamentals of ethics." (2010). p. 161</ref> According to Kant autonomy is part of the reason that we hold others morally accountable for their actions. Human actions are morally praise- or blame-worthy in virtue of our autonomy. Non- autonomous beings such as plants or animals are not blameworthy due to their actions being non-autonomous.<ref name="Shafer-Landau, Russ 2010 Pp161"/> Kant's position on crime and punishment is influenced by his views on autonomy. Brainwashing or drugging criminals into being law-abiding citizens would be immoral as it would not be respecting their autonomy. Rehabilitation must be sought in a way that respects their autonomy and dignity as human beings.<ref>Shafer-Landau, Russ. "The fundamentals of ethics." (2010). p. 163</ref>