Categorical Imperatives

Good will, inclinations, and categorical imperatives are clearly addressed in the statement which the paper started off from. To act out of "good will" for Kant means to act out of a sense of moral obligation or "duty". In other words, the moral agent does a particular action not because of what it produces (its consequences) in terms of human experience, but because he or she recognizes by reasoning that it is morally the right thing to do and thus regards him or herself as having a moral duty or obligation to do that action. In the case of good will, man recognizes that there is a need for universal law, and even if they do not want to participate in it, they recognize that it is the morally right thing to do. Categorical imperative: "Act as if the maxim from which you act were to become through your will a universal law.", in other words, man should only act if he should have personal principles that …show more content…
I believe it is wrong for someone to expect other people to follow a certain law that one does not follow themselves, that is hypocritical behavior that does not fall under good-will. It wouldn't be equal nor fair to the people who follow that certain law and are able to form a master within themselves that allows them to be bound by a law. From a moral perspective, categorical imperative has its pros and cons. Although most of it is true, it’s sometimes not beneficial; which is why many people lack to follow the law and act in a hypocritical behavior. The purpose of categorical imperative is to do something that will help others for the sake of the preserving the human race, rather than the sake of self-will. “The practical imperative will therefore be the following: Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a mean.” (p.