I. Universal
Law formulation: Act only on
that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law. (p. 535, column 2)
A. Alternative version: formula of law of nature.
B. Similar to ‘golden rule’ (do unto others…); see end of “Illustration 4.”
C. Illustration 2 is useful for seeing how Kant’s Categorical Imperative is supposed to work.
II. End
in Itself formulation: Act in
such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the
person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an
end. (p. 538, column 2)
A. Remember, the good will has intrinsic, not merely instrumental, value.
B. Instrumental (or “relative”)
values could ground only hypothetical imperatives.
C. Rational beings, who can act from motives (not
just impulses), have wills.
D. The treating of rational beings as
ends-in-themselves is required because of their having a will, whose goodness
cannot be subordinated to any other end.
III. Kingdom
of Ends formulation: Act on
the maxims of a member who makes universal laws for a merely possible kingdom
of ends. (p. 543, column 2)
A. A “kingdom” is just a “systematic union of different rational beings under common laws” (p. 540, column 2).
B. “Ends” is used for things that are ends-in-themselves, i.e. rational beings (beings with “wills”).
C. If you are following the Universal Law
formulation of the Categorical Imperative, then you are following the Kingdom
of Ends formulation: if the maxim from which you act could become a universal
law, then you could legislate it for a kingdom of ends. But then you would be
following the End in Itself formulation too, since you would be treating others
as ends in themselves.