1. Tasks – Whiteboard First!
How does Kant phrase the categorical imperative in his first formulation?
Give an example of a maxim (remember a general law!) that can be universalised.
Give an example of a maxim that cannot be universalized. Higher grades should be able to explain whether it is a contradiction in conception (i.e. makes no logical sense) or a contradiction in will (i.e. no-one would rationally want it).

2. 1. Formula of Nature - Universalisability
‘Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law.’
In order to pinpoint whether a maxim has moral worth, and truly springs from the ‘good will’, we have to ask ourselves the following question: Would you like other people, who find themselves in the same situation as you, to always act in the same way?
If not, you are involved in a contradiction and what you are thinking of doing goes against reason and the good will. This is immoral, because it goes against our nature as rational human beings.

3. Formula of Nature - Universalisability
‘Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law.’
For Kant there are two possible reasons a law could not be universalised:
Contradictions of the laws of nature / conception’ – these cannot be universalised as they are self contradictory. For example, ‘everyone should make false promises’ – impossible since promises require that someone would believe you, and if everyone made false promises, no one would believe anyone. This leads to perfect duties not to do something.
Contradictions in the will’ – these are not contradictory in themselves, but no rational being would wish to see them universalized. For example ‘don’t help others in need’ – something we all need at some point in our lives, so would not wish to see universalised. This leads to imperfect duties not to do something.

4. Complete the task on page 269 of the textbook.
The Four Step Program!
When it comes to applying Kant’s first categorical imperative then, there are four steps we should take:
Step 1: Work out the underlying maxim. A maxim is a general rule governing our actions. Remember it should be as general as possible.
Step 2: Can you conceive of a world where this is the law for everyone? (i.e. can it be universalised without contradiction?)
Step 3: Can you rationally will that this be a universal moral law? (i.e. would it make sense for people to rationally want this?)
Step 4: If the answer to all the above questions is yes – the action can be said to be morally permissible.
Complete the task on page 269 of the textbook.

5. Lesson Objective
To understand the second formulation of the categorical imperative.
To ensure understanding of Kantian ethics by comparing it to Utilitarianism.

6. “Act as you wish, even if it impedes on someone else's autonomy.”
Second Formulation
Consider again the law of universalizability. Would it be possible to universalise the following maxim?
“Act as you wish, even if it impedes on someone else's autonomy.”
If not, why not?

7. Formula of Humanity
‘Act in such as way as you always treat humanity whether in your own person or on the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
With this formulation of the Categorical Imperative, Kant hits on one of the fundamental principles of morality. We must never treat other as tools to be used as we wish, but as valuable beings in their own right.
Another way of saying this is we should avoid using others for our own benefit with no thought for their wishes or rationality. We must instead treat them with the respect that their humanity deserves.
How did Kant reach this? He sees it as a universal self-evident principle (a priori). It begins with a person observing that one is a rational and free agent and the idea that you cannot universalise impeding on peoples autonomy. Once you recognise this, you realise people in general have intrinsic worth and should not be used.

8. Let’s look at some examples…
Formula of Humanity
‘Act in such as way as you always treat humanity whether in your own person or on the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
It’s important to note here that Kant thinks that this formulation has exactly the same meaning (and the same results) as the universal law formulation. He just thinks it presents the idea in a way that is more intuitive.
Let’s look at some examples…

9. Formula of Humanity How does this make you feel?
‘Act in such as way as you always treat humanity whether in your own person or on the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
You acquire a new friend, Sam. Sam goes out of her way to be nice to you, pays you compliments, lets you borrow her fancy camera and even buys you a thoughtful birthday present. However, you find out in reality Sam doesn’t like you at all. She only became friends with you in order to meet your cousin who is an up and coming journalist. Sam thinks your journalist cousin could help make her famous.
How does this make you feel?
Was Sam’s behavior wrong? Why?
How does Kant express this?

10. Formula of Humanity
‘Act in such as way as you always treat humanity whether in your own person or on the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
Which of the following treats people as “ends” not “means”?
Lying to a friend to get them to take you somewhere.
Paying a plumber to mend your sink.
Blowing up someone else to further a terrorist cause.
Blowing up yourself to further a terrorist cause.
Abolishing slavery.
Paying for something with fake £20 notes.
Abortion.
Your plane has crashed; in order to survive you resort to cannibalism.

11. Formula of Humanity Go through the situations on page 269 again.
‘Act in such as way as you always treat humanity whether in your own person or on the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’
Since this version of the categorical imperative is allegedly the same as the first formulation, we would expect the same results in the situations we looked at last lesson:
Go through the situations on page 269 again.
For each one ask if the act involved is treating people merely as a means to an end, or as an end in themselves.
Decide based on this whether or not the action would be judged right according to Kant’s second formulation.

12. The Categorical Imperative
Categorical imperatives are categorical because their function is not to advise us how to satisfy our self-interest or desires; instead, they command us how to act irrespective of our interests or desires.
The categorical imperative is therefore absolute; it is absolutely binding on us, irrespective of our desires or our situation.
Kant famously presents different versions or formulations of the categorical imperative. Although he considers them all to be part of the same moral law. It is these formulations that allow us to work out our duty in any situation.
The first two are absolutely central to his ethical theory, and it’s imperative that you know these inside out.
The Categorical Imperative
1.) “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”
2.) “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.”

13. So what have we covered?...
Having good intentions (good will) is good in itself, regardless of what it achieves.
To have a good will is to be motivated by duty.
Being motivated by duty means doing what is right, regardless of desires / emotions. Following your reason.
Since reason is universal, it makes sense that we should only do things that all beings could rationally do / want (first formulation).
Since all beings are rational, it would also make sense for us to not use them in a way that violates their inherent value. This also couldn’t be universalised.
Therefore, rational beings should only be treated as an end in themselves, not merely as a means to an end (second formulation).

14. Tasks – Whiteboard First!
What is Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative?
What does Kant think about humanity that leads to this formulation?
Give an example of a maxim (remember a general law!) that would not involve treating a person as a means to an end.
Give an example of a maxim that would involve treating a person as a means to an end rather than an end in themselves.
Do you think this is a more intuitive version of the categorical imperative than the first formulation?

15. Comparisons to other theories…
A couple split up. A year later the ex-boyfriend puts various pictures of his ex-girlfriend on the internet. She doesn’t discover this. The pictures bring pleasure to others.
How would an act Utilitarian respond to this case?
How would a rule Utilitarian respond?
Do these responses seem intuitively moral?
What would Kant say in response to this?
What reasons would he give for this response?
Does this response seem intuitively moral? Why?

16. Comparisons to other theories…
A serial killer is on the loose. Thousands of citizens live in a state of fear and demand that the killer be brought to justice. Eventually the mayor selects someone at random from the protesting mob, a man with a known criminal record who is widely disliked. This man is quickly tried, found guilty, and executed. The mob disperses, feeling happy and secure again.
How would an act Utilitarian respond to this case?
How would a rule Utilitarian respond?
Do these responses seem intuitively moral?
What would Kant say in response to this?
What reasons would he give for this response?
Does this response seem intuitively moral? Why?

17. Kant and Human Rights
Kant’s focus on autonomy and the inherent value of all humans in ethics has been extremely influential. The development of human rights is closely linked to these concepts and many of Kant’s arguments have been used to support these ideals.
Slavery, false imprisonment, torture, and so on are all ways of treating people as a means to some other end and therefore undermine their autonomy.
The basis of all human rights is to enable individual, rational autonomy, and Kant’s philosophy played a significant part in their development.

18. How can you summarise this and last lesson?
Lesson Summary
To understand the second formulation of the categorical imperative.
To ensure understanding of Kantian ethics by comparing it to Utilitarianism.
How can you summarise this and last lesson?

19. Exam Style Questions What is a hypothetical imperative? (3 marks)
Outline and explain the difference between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty. (5 marks)
Explain how someone might use the first and second formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative to make a moral decision. (12 marks)

20. Tasks – Whiteboard First!
Use the textbooks (255+) and the handouts to put together a mind-map recapping the main ideas of Kantian ethics.
Ensure you understand:
Why Kant argues that humans should follow our rationality over desires.
The difference between acting out of duty and acting in accordance with duty.
The difference between a categorical and hypothetical imperative.
The first formulation of the categorical imperative and some examples of maxims that would pass / fail.
The two ways a maxim can fail (failure in conception / failure of will)
The second formulation of the categorical imperative and some examples of maxims that would pass / fail.
How the theory might compare to Utilitarianism on the surface.

21. Strengths of the theory…
What are the strengths of Kant’s deontological ethics?