What Is Kant's Second Moral Maxim

Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, was born and raised in Konigsberg, a city in East Prussia, on April 22nd, 1724. He was born into a family devoted to Pietism, a Protestant sect. Being apart of this movement, Kant and his family believed in simplicity and obedience to moral law, and as a result, lived puritanical lives. Kant attended the local university and made a living as a private tutor. Following this, he worked as a private teacher at the university until being officially hired to teach logic and metaphysics. Later on, Kant wrote his Critique of Pure Reason (1781-1787) alongside many other works. Throughout his philosophical career, Kant established his theory on deontological ethics based on reasoning and motives for good will, thus, …show more content…
Firstly, Kant demonstrates his views on how others should be treated through his two moral Maxims. In his first moral maxim, Kant states “I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (CCCB, 16), demonstrating his belief that everyone in the world is equal and that no individuals are above others and therefore, should not have the right to act differently. In other words, all life principles must be applicable, equal and fair to all people if they are to be universal. Furthermore, Kant’s second moral maxim states, “Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end” (CCCB, 17). In fact, Kant believed that people should not be used and exploited for the benefit of another. For example, Kant believed that workers with little power should not be taken advantage of by their employers. He believed that all workers must be treated with respect. Similar to Kant’s beliefs, Marx believed in the equality of all people, no matter their class or status, and he believed that this could only occur with the fall of capitalism and the birth of communism. Marx was in favour of a revolution against the Bourgeoisie (ruling class) that would be led by the …show more content…
Kant expresses his theory by stating “humans are by nature free” (CCCB, 15). He believes that we all have a duty or obligation to do something and that we have the freedom to do it. He believes that “what we ought to do, we can do” (CCCB.15), therefore, we act on our own free will, and are therefore, free. While freedom cannot be proven through empirical reasoning, Kant argues through practical certainty that humans are free. For example, if individuals “ought” to choose ethical actions based on obligation and duty they must therefore, be free to do so. Contrastingly, Marx believes that not all humans are free. Although he is against the class system, he believed that it remained an issue in society and that “there was a strain in all societies because the social organization never kept pace with the development of the means of production” (W.B.E.190b). Marx believed that while the ruling class had freedom the Proletariat did not. They were controlled by their employers and thus, did not have the freedom that the employers, or production owners, had. For example, while the owners of any privately owned means of production could decide to take a day off for whatever reason, the working class beneath them could not. If a worker decides to take a day off, whether it be for illness, family reasons, etc., they could lose their job and be