Activity 12: Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative

Directions:
1. Watch the lecture video entitled “Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative” by
PHILO-NOTES (Free Online Learning Materials). Here’s the link.
https://youtu.be/wVjC3Zn8XC0

2. After watching the lecture video, please provide what is being asked in the following
statements.

a. What is morality for Immanuel Kant?

 Immanuel Kant defines morality as acting in accordance with the Categorical
Imperative; otherwise, an act is considered non-moral or immoral.
b. What is Categorical Imperative?
 Kant regards the Categorical Imperative as the supreme moral principle.
Moreover, Categorical Imperative expresses an absolute command, for
example, "Don't cheat"; because it lacks an "if-then" clause, this command
does not impose a condition.
c. Briefly discuss Kant’s concept of the GOOD WILL.
 According to Kant, good will is defined as the ability to facilitate a human act.
A good will is good not because it produces good results, as in pragmatic
ethics, or because it brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of
people, as in utilitarian ethics, but because it is valuable in and of itself. As a
result, good will is good regardless of the circumstances. Furthermore, good
will is demonstrated when it is done for the sake of duty. As a result, in order
to be called "good will," it must be done for the sake of duty.
d. Briefly discuss the relation between duty and the moral worth of an act.
 According to Kant, the motive of any moral act should be duty, and inclination
or self-interest should never be the motive of any moral act. As a result, an act
has moral worth if it is done for the sake of duty; otherwise, an act has no
moral worth or is immoral if it is done for the sake of inclination.
 Furthermore, Kant emphasizes that actions that are in accordance with duty
have no moral worth but are not necessarily immoral. While actions performed
for the sake of duty have moral worth.
e. Briefly discuss Kant’s first formulation of the Categorical Imperative (principle of
universality).
 The first formulation of the Categorical Imperative is the principle of
universality, and it only treats acts based on that maxim, with the intent that it
become a universal law. However, the principle of universality requires that
every maxim on which someone acts must be such that others are willing to
make it the case that everyone always acts on that maxim when in a similar
situation. The idea here is that if the maxim the principle on which the moral
agent acts cannot be universalized, then the action has no moral worth.

f. Briefly discuss Kant’s second formulation of the Categorical Imperative (principle

of humanity).
 The second formulation of the Categorical Imperative is the principle of
humanity, which states that one should never treat humanity, whether in one's
own person or that of another, as a means to an end. Kant believes that
humans have intrinsic value and should never be treated as a means to an
end. Because, according to Kant, treating humans as means reduces them to
the level of things or animals. As a result, any act that uses humanity as a
means to an end is immoral.
g. State important takeaways from this lesson (Kant’s Categorical Imperative).
 According to Kant's Categorical Imperative, the act must be in accordance
with the Categorical Imperative in order to be morally right; otherwise, it is
immoral.
 The Categorical Imperative is the supreme moral principle that expresses an
absolute command.
 Kant defines good will as the ability to facilitate a human act. Good will is
considered good due to its intrinsic value. Furthermore, it lacks any and all
qualifications.
 According to Kant, an act has moral worth if it is done for the sake of duty;
otherwise, an act has no moral worth or is immoral if it is done for the sake of
inclination.
 The Categorical Imperative has two formulations: the first is the principle of
universality, and the second is the principle of humanity. It is stated in the
universality principle that an act only on that maxim whereby can, at the same
time, become a universal law. In layman's terms, this means that if you can do
something, everyone else should be able to do it as well. On the other hand,
the principle of humanity states that one should never treat humanity, whether
in one's person or the person of another, as a means to an end. This theory
defines what it means to treat someone as an end, as well as what it means
to treat another as a mere means. Treating a human as an end in itself would
be treating that person with the respect he or she deserves.