Kant's Categorical Imperative Analysis

While there are four formulations of Kant’s Categorical Imperative, two of them are relevant today. The first formulation is the Formula of Universal Law, which says, “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” (McCormick). This means that you are not allowed to do anything that you would not be willing to let everyone else do (McCormick). Also, that you are not allowed to make exceptions for yourself. That meaning that you cannot say it is okay for you to do something, but not okay for others to do it. The second formulation is the Formula of the End in Itself, which says, “So act as to treat humanity, both in your own person, and in the person of every other, always at the same time as an end, never simply as a means.” (McCormick). This means that we should never use or treat people as objects or pawns in trying to get what we want. Instead, we should understand and recognize the value we all have, and understand that we all bring something different to the table.

In theory, there is nothing wrong with treating each other equally and holding each other to the same expectations. As there is also nothing wrong with not using each other in order to get what we want. An example often used with the first formulation is lying. Kant believed that lying is always wrong, no matter the outcome. While we can all find a way to make an exception to this rule, as Rachels did in our textbook, is it not fair to continue to state that overall, lying is morally wrong? The two formulations are not equivalent, that much is clear. While they both force us to take everyone into account rather than just ourselves, the first formulation requires us to make moral decisions with everyone in mind, and the second requires us to consider moral