CAAYAO, Jean Margaret B.

ARC22

REFLECTION PAPER:
The Categorical Imperative by Immanuel Kant

Immanuel Kant, although being known for having unorthodox views and distrust on religion, had
focused his life on expounding on philosophies that would later become one of the widely interpreted major
works in ethics today. The philosophies on his book, “Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals”, places a
great emphasis on the moral worth of an action being determined by its motive or reason behind it, and not by
the consequences. With this, Kant argues that the worth of a motive can be determined by asking whether we
could turn that motive into a universally applicable maxim. He summed this up in one ultimate principle, the
Categorical Imperative.

From my personal understanding of the text, Kant had based the human moral compass on how it is in
harmony with nature. This is one of his points that I can agree with as I believe in the truth that we should
always have nature as the neutral ground for the basis of our actions; not only because it is a thing that exists
on its own, but also because with the definition of “nature” being “a kind or class usually distinguished by
fundamental or essential characteristics”, I do think that nature is authentic in itself and far from being artificial.
After all, the few definitions of its derivative, “natural”, could further prove my statement, such that it means
“closely resembling an original; not made or caused by humankind; having a physical or real existence as
contrasted with one that is spiritual, intellectual, or fictitious; or formulated by human reason alone rather than
revelation”. Correspondingly, the last definition mentioned goes on to support the concept of Kant’s categorical
imperative, which is that the maxim of our actions must founded on reason. If we were to create a maxim, we
should have these points in mind; and for those, I can therefore presume that a maxim must also be worldly.
On Kant’s imperative that states a maxim must be willed to be universalized, I have concluded the major point
being that the maxim must be able to have its scope of applications be unanimously agreeable in all aspects,
whether it may be in regard to the laws of nature, or considering its social repercussions. And this is also what I
meant about maxims being ‘worldly’; that we must have them be in response to universally impending
conditions rather than just focusing them towards our own principles or selfish inclinations.

Further into Kant’s imperative, he also explained the supreme practical principle for the will of our
actions: “act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end
and never as a means only”. When we put this into perspective, Kant simply tells us that human beings have
inherent value and should never be treated as instruments to our advantage, even with ourselves. While he
says that we should be thinking in a universal sense, to me, that doesn’t mean we should neglect ourselves
and let us be deprived of the opportunity to grow and still find purpose for the things we do, in the upright
sense. I think that what makes us wholly human is the ‘humane’ aspect in each one of us, which potentially
stems from the moral and rational mind. For the sake of the existence of humanity itself, we must be able to act
upon our moral responsibility of treating people equally with value. But this is where the importance of intent
also comes, as Kant highly believes that the (good) will is the one that matters, instead of the consequences of
our actions. This innate motive is what defines the morality of human soul; and for that, we are required to
exercise the power of our reason. For the sake of the existence of humanity, I think this is important as well, as
I consider the rationality of man to be one of the most essential components for sustaining a livable world.

In conclusion to Immanuel Kant’s text, he presented us the objective rules to attaining a desirable moral
status such that 1) we must will the maxim of our actions to be a universal law, 2) we must grasp that rational
beings exist as an end in themselves and not merely as means, and 3) we must determine the moral worth of
our actions by motives and not the consequences. If I were to develop a principle for myself, I should evaluate
first whether if it satisfies those three guidelines. Moreover, Kant prompts us to be purposeful with our actions,
but not in the sense of using other people to achieve our means. For this, we are expected of a maxim
grounded on reason. To be grounded in thought also means going back to nature, for it is a creative and
controlling force in the universe that keeps us in the real world and strays us from biases and fiction.