Therefore, if a person is doing something for the consequence that such an acting may brought they he/she is doing it for the wrong reasons. According to Kant the only thing “good without limitation is a good will that performs actions solely for sake of duty”(compare to utilitarians). Therefore, acting for sake of duty tells you are being …show more content…
For this, it means that there is a notion of law or principles being followed. Thus, acting from one 's duty, permits one 's action to set off any inclinations, they may have abided by the law by following it. This is not about goals or purpose but about our principles and this apply to everybody. Additionally, for Kant “good will” should be exercised even in the absence of good effects because moral truths are based on reason, thus it becomes a moral law. For instance, if a person knows that what he/she is doing is wrong, then this person is not exercising good will. Therefore, a person is only exercising good will if he/she knows that what he/she is doing is the right thing to do and not because he/she is expecting a reward or a positive feeling from this act. Then a person is only exercising good will when he/she is acting in accordance with her duty. For Kant you cannot tell if an actions is good just by looking because moral duties should come from reasoning, which determines the will (makes you do the things that you do). Moral truths are not received from a high through divine revelation or