The categorical imperative of Kant is the moral law of the free man
The golden rule of ethics is to act in relation toto neighbors as we would like them to act towards us, are often mistakenly identified with the postulate of Immanuel Kant. Wrong, because the German philosopher wrote about this not at all. The categorical imperative of Kant-something that expresses a moral law, an unconditional "must". It is regardless of whether we want to do something or not.
Ethics of Kant - a categorical imperative and the concept of maxim
There are two kinds of imperatives: except categorical is still hypothetical, or conditional. It is defined as a conditional form of a command, in which case the binding nature of an action has a basis in the fact that this very action is the desired (or may be so). The conditional imperative pays attention to the content, and the value of an action or action here is determined by what it's done for.
In contrast, a categorical imperativeKant - is something mandatory in itself, a criterion by which to determine the morality of actions. The formulation of it by the author himself sounds like this: a person should act so that his actions, his actions can play a role of an example for others, that is, he can do only what he would agree with, if it were done all around him.
AND. Kant defined the maximum as a certain proposition, which connects man's goals and his actions with each other. These are subjective views on how to behave, not even so much as views, as principles, beliefs. The categorical imperative of Kant suggests that one should have only those views that will suit us, if they become convictions for all who surround us, for the society in general. At the same time, the concrete situation does not matter - everything that corresponds to the imperative is moral.
What Kant offers is an offer to the mind,but not to feelings, such an assessment of their actions can produce intelligence, the heart is not capable of such. Although the knowledge of a person around the world begins with an empirical, that is, with sensory sensations, it is incomplete. Rather, in the knowledge of nature this method is good enough. But to judge the moral, you need something different. Since, according to the philosopher, the laws of morality can not be deduced on the basis of their own experience.
Therefore, it is impossible to create scientific knowledge about morality and law as it does in the natural sciences. Hence - to obtain the necessary, using as a source of judgments reason.
Freedom and morality
A truly free one who is guided bycertain rules, puts some rules above the temporary circumstances. A highly moral person can not proceed in his actions from some kind of conditional rules that change from situation to situation. Such a person must measure his actions and take them, proceeding from an unconditional moral law created by the mind itself, not limiting, but giving freedom. The categorical imperative of Kant - and there is such an unconditional law. He does not talk about how to act in a particular situation. There is only a general idea, the concept of duty to humanity, a person has the full moral freedom to do as he pleases - the only thing that "in any way" should correspond to the moral law as much as possible.
For the philosopher there is no coercion or violencein following the imperative. Morality is something that has as its basis the inner motivations of a person, an understanding of his duty, including that of society. Therefore, the categorical imperative of Kant merely gives a pivot, while offering individuals freedom. Including freedom from religion, and from any stereotypes towards society, because this rule can apply in his life to absolutely anyone.