Monday, January 30, 2017

Tentative Answer: Difference between a categorical and hypothetical imperative

A categorical imperative is an action that is necessary in itself, without any other end. The action is objectively necessary without any reference to purpose. A hypothetical imperative differs in purpose as an action that aims to achieve something else, or to an end. It entails that an action is good for a possible or actual purpose.

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" is not a hypothetical imperative because you wish it upon not only yourself, but all of humanity as well. This maxim is applicable to everyone, and thus serves as a universal law. Universality of law is part of the criterion for morality, and in this way we know that the moral maxim driving the action is not a means to a purpose, because that would be hypothetical and not derived from duty alone. Rather, it is a categorical imperative, because that entails one to act in a way that one would want the maxim of their action to become universal law.

No comments:

Post a Comment