m being a universal law because there shouldnt be different rules for different laws. The rules and laws should apply to every situation. An act is either wrong or right, based on his universality law. For example, giving money to a homeless person just to get him/her to leave you alone would be judged not moral by Kant because it was done for the wrong reason. With Kants belief in mind; if the consequence of immoral behavior were dealt with in a legal structure, people would be prosecuted for "EVERYTHING" since there are no extenuating circumstances. Kant's categorical imperative is a tri-dynamic statement of philosophical thought:(1) "So act that the maxim of you could always hold at the same time as a principle establishing universal law."(2) "Act so as to treat humanity, whether in your own person in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.'(3) "Act according to the maxims if a universally legislative member of a merely potential kingdom of ends." In other words, Kant argues that particular action requires conscious thought of the rule governing the action. Whether if everyone should follow that rule, and if the rule is acceptable for universal action, it should be adopted. If the rule is unacceptable, then it should be rejected. In order to understand whether or not an action follows Kant's "categorical imperative," we must prescribe those norms that we wish to be universal laws.We must make the judgment on whether or not universal ethics is possible. I believe that a bit of universability exists throughout the world; don't kill your neighbor, be kind to others, do not steal, etc. yet, individual perception of the world by people prevents the possibility of an all-encompassing universal code of ethics. I believe along with Kant that we should develop a friendship and code to help our fellow man. We all have a duty to treat others the way we want to be treated.(Golden Rule) The one thing I disagree with is tha...
