Kant's Categorical Imperative: Universal Law

This class, Ethics, has shown me many different moral theories that has opened my eyes in many ways; however, I will make a case that shows Kant provides us with the superior moral theory. There could be numerous ways to prove that Kant provides us with this, but I will explain the three reasons why I believe it. First of all, the categorical imperative—Universal Law—gives straightforward rules that everyone can apply and use in their daily lives. Secondly, the other categorical imperative—The Formula of Humanity—aspires to everyone being treated equally and correctly. Lastly, Kant’s moral theory is based on the intention of the action, not the consequences that arise from it. Therefore, no matter what they are doing, it is for the right reasons and to not get something out of it. A strong objection would be there is no flexibility in …show more content…
It could be argued that we should be able to make exceptions regarding certain situations or for specific people. However, it would be a disaster if this was allowed. Firstly, if someone thought breaking a promise in a certain situation was acceptable, everyone would start bending the rule to be able to do it. This is highly problematic because it would cause promises to lose their values.My second refute towards the objection is consistency. The legal system does not permit people to break the laws because of certain situations or certain people. If they let Justin Bieber murder people, everyone else would think its okay or say, “He did it, why can’t I?” If Kant allowed exceptions in his moral theory, it would have that same outcome. In my opinion, it’s not right to allow people to do something that they would not want others doing. They should not be able to make exceptions for themselves. I think having this consistency in Kant’s moral theory is what makes it superior. It results in less confusion for everyone and there is no special treatment for