Kant - Good Will, Duty, and the Categorical Imperative

The Good Will
All good qualities of character could be made bad if not for good character. Good will can judge the extent to which we are influenced by outside forces of good fortune and to the extent to which we are happy.

Moderation and self-control are indeed good, but can result in a more diabolical villain if not coupled with the principles of good will.

"Good will" is virtuous in and of itself and cannot be devalued in worth.

Moral Worth
Maxim - an expression of a general truth or principle, esp. an aphoristic or sententious one (dictionary.com).
We should do things through love and the duty is beholds. We must not act from selfishness. If our actions fulfill that duty, then we are said to be doing something with moral worth.

Inclination vs. duty

Difference in doing something from duty which does not grant it moral worth, or something from inclination.

Your moral worth is based on doing something you should do (duty) and not something you want to do (inclination). I think.

We should not strive for something with a pre-conceived expectation.

The Supreme Principle of Morality: The Categorical Imperative
You can will that your maxim be made universal law.

You cannot make promises that you cannot keep, cannot be a universal law. It would destroy itself because there would be no meaning in promises if everyone acted in such a way.

Acting in the pure respect for the common law is duty.

Imperatives: Hypothetical and Categorical
"The Will" is nothing but practical reason. However, "the will" is not necessarily as subjective as reason and therefore, is not completely tied to reason.

The objective will is based on Imperatives, which command two principles:
Hypothetical - the necessity of an action that is willed. Good as a means to something else.
Categorical - an action is necessary to itself without other ends; objective. Good in of itself.

Act by principle as if they were the only reasonable laws of the universe = act as God would.

Four Illustrations
1. You can't kill yourself as an act of self-love by ending your suffering. It would be a contradiction because you would not be improving your life if you are dead.

2. A man needs to borrow money and wants to ask to borrow with a promise that he will repay them, but knows that he cannot. This is also a contradiction because it would universally imply that anyone could make empty promises about anything if they are in the same situation.

3. A man could do great things will his talents if we worked to perfect them, but enjoys hanging out and not doing anything. This could not pass as a universal law of nature because as reasonable human being, we want to develop ourselves.

4. I man is prosperity and is surrounded by wretchedness, he does nothing and lets it continue on. This is not a universal law of nature for someone of good will because human life could not exist with such as maxim.

Second Formulation of the Categorical Imperative: Humanity as an End in Itself
Humans are an end in themselves and never as a means.

Worth is only based on conditional aspects.

Humans are an objective principle in that our rational nature exists as an end itself. Follows the idea of "The Golden Rule."

The Kingdom of Ends
Our moral actions are considered within a kingdom of laws: moral laws. Whereas we determine what are deemed as ends and what are means.