An Examination of Kant's Categorical Imperative Regarding Morality

This essay examines Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative and its relevance to the moral issue of stealing. It begins by explaining the core principles of Kant's ethical framework, including the concept of unconditional moral laws and the importance of treating individuals as ends in themselves rather than mere means. The essay then applies these principles to the act of stealing, analyzing it through the lens of Kant's first and second formulations of the Categorical Imperative. It argues that stealing is morally unacceptable because it cannot be universalized and because it violates the principle of treating others with respect. The essay references Kant's ideas and provides a concise analysis of the implications of Kant's philosophy. This essay provides a valuable resource for students studying philosophy and ethics, offering a clear and concise explanation of Kant's ideas and their application to a specific moral dilemma.

RUNNING HEAD: THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE OF KANT
THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE OF KANT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

1THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE OF KANT
With reference to Kant’s categorical imperative, how could one argue that
stealing is wrong?
Immanuel Kant, the creator of critical philosophy, explained that categorical imperative
is a moral law which is unconditional for every agent. The categorical imperative is an objective,
unconditional, rationally necessary principal, which must be followed instead of any natural
desires. According to Kant, Every moral requirement can be justified by the principals of the
categorical imperative and immoral principals are unjustified because they violate the principle
of the Categorical Imperative (Machan, 2016).
By using the categorical imperative of Kant, a person can justify that sealing is wrong. To
evaluate an action whether it is morally acceptable or not the Categorical Imperative of Kant will
be used. There are two formulations in the categorical imperative of Kant. The first formulation
refers that evaluate the maxim behind stealing (from the perspective of the thief) and consider
whether or not the maxim can become a universal law (Iwasa, 2013). The second formulation
should be considered that whether or not stealing includes treating other people merely as a
means to an end rather than an end in themselves. According to the Categorical Imperative of
Kant, It is not possible to morally accept stealing. From the perspective of the thief, it can be said
that maxim of the thief is’ steal anything whenever it please or whenever it is necessary’. Kant
stated that maxim behind stealing cannot be morally acceptable because if everyone steals other
property whenever they pleased then the idea of privet property will collapse.

2THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE OF KANT
References:
Iwasa, N. (2013). Reason alone cannot identify moral laws. Journal of Value Inquiry, 47(1-2),
67-85. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-013-9384-y
Machan, T. R. (2016). Philosophy with meaning. Journal of Self-Governance and Management
Economics, 4(4), 62-92. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1906045958?
accountid=30552