Kant And Individualism

Kant defines that morality is associated with the concept good will. Good will is thus acting in a way that is right, because it is the right thing to do. As humans, we have a rationale of what is right and what is wrong; however, this is sometimes misguided because we are not purely rational. This misdirection can lead us to indulge in our animal passions or desires, resulting in immoral action. This leads us to become too aware and concerned with our own personal welfare, that we then develop a strong sense of individualism. For us to act morally, we then have to have a sense of duty to it. Duty is “a natural sound understanding and does not need so much to be taught as only to be brought to light.” In other words, we as humans have an understanding …show more content…
The divine, or God, is the only purely rational being. God does not become distracted or self-absorbed in any way; God is not an animal being. As a result, God has a holy will where he never is obligated or inclined to do what is right, God simply always knows. This is why that as only being rational, we as human beings require a duty to act morally in order to overcome our inner conflicts and passions.

4. Explain how the first formulation of the categorical imperative functions as a standard of morality (i.e., as a method for determining whether an action is moral or immoral). The first formulation of categorical imperative can be viewed as practical law. In order to tell whether or not an action is in fact moral, the intention, or maxim, envisioned by a person, should be willing to make it a universal law of nature. To be a universal law of nature, the maxim is both universally valid and universally followed. There are no exceptions and “no conditions to which it is restricted.” If an individual were to imagine a world where everyone completes an action according to their maxim, and they are subsequently dissatisfied with the outcome, then their maxim, and most likely their action, is thus …show more content…
The categorical imperative is to be understood as commanding an action that is good in itself. Whereas the hypothetical imperative is an action as a means to achieving something else desired. As stated previously, to act morally is to act with good will, to do what is right. It can be concluded then that the moral imperative would have to be the categorical imperative because it consists of acting with good will. This imperative of morality is such because it does not concern “the material of the action and its intended result, but the form and the principle from which it results.” There is no trickery or sneakiness involved in this imperative, there is no means trying to achieve something