Abstract
Kant's Groundwork is the most read and surely the most exasperating of his works on practical philosophy. Both its structure and its arguments remain obscure and controversial. A quick list of unsettled questions reminds one how much is in doubt. The list might include the following: Why does Kant shift the framework of his discussion three times in a short work? Does he establish that there is a supreme principle of morality? Does he show that the Categorical Imperative is that supreme principle? Does he show that human beings are free agents for whom such principles of morali ty are important? What is the relationship between the various apparently distinct formulations of the Categorical Imperative? To what extent are any (or all) of them action-guiding? This paper concentrates on the last two of these questions. It is mainly about the equivalence of the various formulations of the Categorical Im perative: it also sketches ways in which the Categorical Imperative can guide action. I shall comment only on three significantly different formulations, the Formula of Universal Law (FUL), The Formula of the End-in-Itself (FEI) and the (more briefly) on the Formula of the Kingdom of Ends (FKE).1 By way of reminder the three formulations may be stated:
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
