Final Paper

Unraveling the Concept of a Categorical Imperative

Robyn Brollier

Philosophy 1120-403: Ethics And Moral Problems

December 13, 2017

 Imagine a world where humans were not rational beings. Imagine if morality did not

exist. There would be am excessive amount of lying, cheating, stealing and imposing harm on

others simply because there is no law stating that it is wrong to do so. The entire meaning of life

as we know it would be nonexistent. Do you like what you see? Do you agree with the actions of

your neighbors? The imaginary life that is now engraved in your mind is exactly what Immanual

Kant strived to get rid of with the concept of a categorical imperative. Kant believed that the

only thing in the world that can be considered good without qualification is a good will. A

good will comes from within oneself because you are engraved with what is right and what is

wrong, not considering all other aspects that may arise. He believed in a universal law that went

as so Always act such that the maxim of your action can be willed as a universal law,1 which

simply means that as a rational being one should act as you would want others to act towards all

other things.

Kant wrote one of the most inspirational texts in the history of philosophy, the

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals in which he created three propositions of duty: first

proposition stated that for an action to an expression of duty, it must be done from an incentive

of duty, not merely in accordance with duty; the second proposition is non-consequentialism, he

wrote that a dutiful action does not have worth in the consequence attained from it, but the

maxim upon which is was resolved meaning that you should act based on what is right because

it is right, not because you have to; and lastly, the third and quite possibly the most important

proposition said that a duty is the necessity of an action from respect for the law. This law in

which Kant wrote about is not a law made by the government but the pure moral law, also

known as the universal law. To further explain what the concept of a categorial imperative, he

1
Kant, Immanuel, and Mary J. Gregor. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
also created three formulas: The Formula of Humanity, The Formula of Autonomy, and most

famous, The Formula of Universal Law.

The Formula of Universal Law goes like this act only on that maxim through which

you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. This is a very wordy

explanation for a simple concept that means whatever action you chose to make, you must be

okay with everyone else in the world making the same decision. For example, a little white lie is

still a lie and by lying, no matter how small, you are agreeing to the law in which everyone else

is now allowed to lie. Now, imagine that this became true and everyone around you is going to

lie in order to get what they want or need from a situation. Eventually that lie will come back

around and hurt you or even worse make your words and all other once rational beings words

untrustworthy. As rational beings, we must obey moral requirements regardless of our own

personal agenda. Obeying the universal law is not always convenient nor is it easy but it is our

duty to act only as we can will that everyone else will act in such a way.

Although, not all humans will act as a rational being and many of us cannot even follow

the pure moral law that Kant created for us, it very important that we strive to do so no matter

how difficult. As stated before, by acting in a certain way we are promoting said action to be

universally acceptable whether we mean to do so or not. We have all heard the Golden Rule

before treat others the way you wish to be treated, Kant believed in this rule however, he

called it the Formula of Humanity. The Formula of Humanity is to always treat human beings,

including yourself, as ends, never merely as means. Humans are ends in themselves, meaning

that you should never use another person for your own benefit insofar that they are unaware of

their sole purpose to you. People were not made for your own personal use unless they have

consented. An example of consent would be such that a student has registered for a course with
the goals of learning the curriculum and obtaining the needed credits for his or her degree and in

agreement the professor has a duty of teaching the course with dedication of ensuring all students

in said course will complete their intended goals.

On the contrary, Kant claims that The Formula of Autonomy solely relies on rational

beings to self-legislate by deliberately giving oneself the moral law; which in short means to

write your own moral laws into action. We are not meant to rely on others to guide our lives for

us. Tracing back to the previous example of the student and the professor, it is the students

responsibility to follow the syllabus and complete all the assignments to receive a passing grade;

there is only so much the professor can do to ensure that the students will pass their class insofar

that the professor completes their duties of teaching the class. This example may be a stretch

from what Kant meant by a categorical imperative in which it is becoming an example of the

hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives basically mean that if you want something

you must do something to get it whereas a categorical imperative is more of a command to do

good because it is good, not because you want something in the end.

If we were to follow a hypothetical imperative as a law for rational beings rather than the

categorical imperative, it would go against everything Kant believed in. Hypothetical

imperatives were created so that if we wanted something then we ought to do something for it.

Honestly, this seems to be more of a utilitarianism way of thinking such that somebody should

act on a duty with hopes of bettering the existence of themselves and all others around them.

Mills theory is shallow in comparison to Kant because Mill does not care about humans as an

end the way the Formula of Humanity or Autonomy intended. For example, Mill believed in the
Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP)2 which states that actions are right insofar as they promote

happiness and wrong if they do not promote happiness. Whereas Kant does not care whether an

action will create the greatest amount of happiness for the greater amount of people, it only

matters if it is right or wrong within reason. These types of moral theories can quickly turn ugly

without the concept of a universal law and the help of a good will. Kants theory is more

adequate than competing moral theories that are based on teleological goals.

Teleological goals (teleological from Greek telos, end; logos, science)3 are derived

from a duty or moral obligations in which a desirable as an end. After studying Kants

categorical imperatives, I believe that there should never be a thought of an end goal. As a

rational being with a good will that is meant to be good without limitation or qualification,

everyone should do good simply because it is good, not because they must. The categorical

imperative is based on a deontological goal, meaning the study of the nature of duty and

obligation. Kants theory does not consider the consequences of any good willed action, good

is only derived from a priori practical law that tells us what our duty is as a rational being. A

priori is something we can know from the categorical imperative independently of existence.

Now reimagine a world where humans are in fact, rational beings and do live morally.

There would be no lying, cheating, or imposing any such harm on others because there is a

universal law engraved within us to only do good and act only on which is right. Kant succeeded

2
John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism.
3
The Editors of Encyclopdia Britannica. "Teleological ethics." Encyclopdia Britannica. April

24, 2008. Accessed December 13, 2017. https://www.britannica.com/topic/teleological-ethics.

to write a law that was easy for all rational beings to follow, however life becomes difficult at

times and we, as humans, struggle to follow the three basic laws of duty that Kant wrote in his

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. After unraveling what is meant by his claim that a

good will is the only thing in the world that can be considered good without qualification we

now ought to obey the moral requirements regardless of our personal life because when we do,

we are acting that the maxim of an action can be willed as a universal law.
 Bibliography

Kant, Immanuel, and Mary J. Gregor. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

The Editors of Encyclopdia Britannica. "Teleological ethics." Encyclopdia Britannica. April

24, 2008. Accessed December 13, 2017. https://www.britannica.com/topic/teleological-ethics.

John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism.