Kant’s Imperatives

Kant considers human nature to be unique and peculiar since it is dictated by universal laws that lead to logical systems. Kant believes that humans, as natural objects, follow universal laws that conform to nature, creating a coherent system that is dictated by universal imperatives of duty (McCarty). These imperatives hence form the deliverances of practical reason as they are foundations to moral actions that will become universal laws contributing to or destroying the natural coherent system.

A holy will can be defined as actions that are driven by both inclination and reason. Persons driven by holy will act without the influence of moral obligation or duty. The holy will considers the moral life as a continuous struggle whereby morality is the potential law-abiding universal law that ought to be followed for its own benefit.

Hypothetical imperatives dictate human actions with the purpose of achieving a unique goal. Applying reason is conditional for the hypothetical imperative, in the sense that one performs only the actions that will lead to gaining something they desire. The categorical imperative, on the other hand, is one demanding taking or to omit actions regardless of the outcomes that it will bring to the agent. The Categorical imperative points out absolute, unconditional requirements that must be followed in any situation and are considered an end itself (StudeerSnel B.V). It denotes taking only the actions that can be justified to become universal laws.

The principle of technical hypothetical imperatives is analytic since it considers imperatives to bear different individual outcomes depending on the person’s will. Multiple personal ends can be achieved for technical hypothetical imperatives, which makes it analytical. Contrary to the technical hypothetical imperatives, assertoric hypothetical imperatives entail actions with only one purpose of achieving happiness. It dictates humans should take only the actions needed to achieve happiness. Assertoric hypothetical imperatives commit individuals to actions that seek the general goodwill for them. The synthetic principle of the categorical imperative is that people should take only the actions that can fit universal law (McCarty). The categorical imperative through the principle considers moral actions should not necessarily lead to a positive outcome for the agent. The categorical imperative is linked to autonomy in the sense that it considers moral actions as those that treat humans as the end result of the action rather than a means to achieve the agent’s desire. Such a consideration makes the categorical imperative self-sufficient since it binds people’s actions to achieve the best intentions for all others.

Works Cited

McCarty, Richard. “The Categorical Imperative.” 29 April 2015. East Carolina University. <http://myweb.ecu.edu/mccartyr/GW/CategoricalImperative.asp>.

StudeerSnel B.V. Explain the dierence between categorical imperave and hypothecal imperave. 2017. 15 May 2020. <https://www.studocu.com/en-gb/document/canterbury-christ-church-university/philosophy-of-religion/summaries/explain-the-difference-between-categorical-imperative-and-hypothetical-imperative/1546572/view>.