Summary
Highlights
The first formulation of the categorical imperative is based on the principle of universality: 'Act only on that Maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.' This means that the principle guiding an action must be universalizable; if it cannot be willed for everyone to act on, then the action lacks moral worth. For example, stealing cannot be universalized, making it impermissible, while helping a friend can be, making it morally right.
The second formulation, known as the formula of the end, states: 'So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, never as a means but always as an end.' Kant believed humans have inherent value and should never be used merely as tools. Treating humans as means reduces them to objects. Thus, any act that treats humanity as a means, such as cheating someone, is morally wrong because it disregards their inherent value and treats them as a means to a selfish end.
For Immanuel Kant, morality is based on acting in accordance with the categorical imperative, which is the supreme principle of morality. An act is moral if it aligns with this imperative. Imperatives are commands, and Kant distinguishes between hypothetical and categorical imperatives. A hypothetical imperative is conditional (e.g., 'If you want to be successful, work hard'), while a categorical imperative is an absolute command, unconditional and without an 'if/then' clause (e.g., 'Do not cheat').
To understand the categorical imperative, one must grasp Kantian ethics' core concepts: goodwill, duty, and the moral worth of an act. Goodwill is good not for its results but by its intrinsic value, making it good without qualification. A goodwill is manifested when an action is performed for the sake of duty. If an act is done with expectations or self-interest, it lacks unqualified goodwill. An autonomous will is self-legislating and not influenced by external factors.
Kant argues that duty should be the sole motive for any moral act, not inclination or self-interest. For instance, a physician treating a patient motivated by their professional duty holds moral worth, unlike one motivated by profit. An act has moral worth if done for the sake of duty; if done out of self-inclination, it has no moral worth. Kant also distinguishes between actions that merely 'accord with' duty (no moral worth) and those done 'for the sake of' duty (moral worth).