Analyzing Kant's Categorical Imperative

1509 Words4 Pages

He was born in 1724, in the Baltic city of Konigsberg, which was part of Prussia and now belongs to Russia, renamed to Kaliningrad. Konigsberg was a town on the eastern sea port of Prussia it was a town dominated by a castle cathedral and the university and alone some senses it was geographically something of an outpost because it was a seaport it had a fairly rich intellectual and cultural life Kant was born into a relatively modest family his father Johan Kant was a saddle maker and his mother came from a saddle making family also. Kant never had much money, he lived very modestly. It wasn’t until his fifties, did he became a fully salaried professor and attained a moderate degree of prosperity. Kant was physically very slight, frail, yet That people had a great need to promote ethical behavior, which of course is still true today. With this Kant came up with the idea called the “Categorical Imperative”, which could also be known as “Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals.” This meant, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” When I first read that I had to read it couple of times and then ask myself. What did this mean? Then realized that it meant “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” With this being said it was offering him a way of testing the morality of an action by imagining how it would be if it were practiced and you were the victim of it. For us it could be as simple as taking something from work. But if we all did it then we wouldn’t have supplies and would have to be guarded. A bit like if you can do it, I can do it too and expect you to be okay with it. The categorical imperative is designed our perspective, to get us to see our own behavior in less immediately personal terms and thereby recognize some of its limitations. Kant went on to argue that this idea could be stated in another way: Act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as mere means. This was intended as a replacement for the Christians command to “love one’s neighbor.” To treat a person as an end, for Kant kept in view that people have a life of their own, in which they all are seeking happiness, fulfillment, deserve justice, and fair treatment. He had argued that the categorical imperative, is the voice of our rational selves. Reading this I believe that this stands today as well, that we truly believe this when we’re thinking sensibly, and it’s the rule our own

Open Document