Final answer:
Kantian philosophy states that an agent is morally responsible for the consequences of an action only if it was not done in accordance with the Categorical Imperative and from duty. The rightness of an action under Kantian ethics is determined by intent and adherence to moral duty, rather than by the consequences of the action.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to Immanuel Kant, bad consequences of permitted actions are imputable to the agent only if the action did not conform to the Categorical Imperative and was not performed from duty.
Kant's moral philosophy, known as deontology, suggests that what makes an action right or wrong is its adherence to duty and not the consequences it produces. Kant’s conception of moral responsibility is not outcome-dependent but instead focuses on the agent’s intent and alignment with duty through the universal law formulated in the Categorical Imperative. The agent's character or the consequences of actions do not determine the rightness of an action; it is the adherence to universal moral laws that matters.
Kant's philosophy prioritizes the moral significance of the action's maxim—the principle behind it—over its consequences. Hence, if an agent performs an action from their sense of duty, and that action is in accordance with a maxim that can be universalized as a moral law, then the agent is not morally blameworthy for bad consequences that were not intended or could not be foreseen.
If, however, the agent acts from impulses or for conditional values rather than from a place of good will and in accordance with duty, then they may bear moral responsibility for unintended bad consequences resulting from such actions.