Relevance: The topic is a part of UPSC CSE General Studies Paper-IV Ethics syllabus. Concepts are particularly relevant in the theory section. Aspirants will also find the article useful for their Essay paper and situation-based questions in personality tests. Moreover, the article’s essence will help aspirants professionally and in life. Here’s an article highlighting concepts of Kant.

Nanditesh Nilay writes for UPSC Ethics Simplified fortnightly. The articles include concepts, philosophy and caselets. Don’t miss the ‘Post Read Question’ below.

Let’s explore the principle of categorical imperative more deeply. In Kant’s opinion, human dignity was most important and man has never been a means for any desired end. He believed that everyone is a free person rather than “everywhere in chains”. Also, everyone is equal to others. So the moral right of a man was ultimate for Kant in terms of equality and freedom. Kant proposed the first version of his Categorical Imperative which is as follows:

a. Whenever we act we should apply the reasons that we would be willing to see any other person apply in a similar situation. It follows the golden rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

b. There is a clear criteria of universalizability and reversibility.

When we observe the second version of Kant’s Categorical Imperative, we will find that it asserts that we should never try to use human beings as means for achieving any ends, rather we should treat them fairly and help them to lead a rational and free life. Here it is amply clear that Kant’s man is an apostle of reason rather than a material or human resource per se. And therefore Kant equips us with the concepts of reversibility and universalizability.

Pause and ponder on the following questions :

How would I have responded if I were in his or her place? Would he have liked it if I would have acted in that way? What would have happened if it would have happened to me? Do we even care to think of such questions today?

However, Kant proposes the test of reversibility for our understanding of whether an action is morally right or not. Let me take you to a reality check. Many of us spend a lot of time talking about politics- right or left. But do we delve deeper to see the world beyond political affiliations? Or putting ourselves in the pain of others. That is where Kant talks about reversibility to gain a moral insight. Reversibility means the person’s reasons for acting must be reason that everyone could act upon in principle. Hence, the reversibility test captures a central idea in Kantian principle — the idea of universalizing one’s actions.

Digging deep into ‘universalizability’, we need to ask — What if someone acted in an undesirable way with my fellow beings? Or What if the whole community began behaving through hate? Here the principle of universalizability will guide us for righteousness as this principle asserts that the reason for choosing any action must be based on the reason that in a similar situation, everyone should act similarly. Simply put, this means that if you do an action, then everyone else should be able to do it too.

Kant brings us closer to the thought that the results of any act are worthless if it is done for self-interest. Kant asserts, “an action which has no moral worth is not the right action.” For him, moral worth comes from the spirit of duty behind the act rather than the result of the act. An act performed only to satisfy pleasure or interest can not be worthy. So, only actions with a sense of duty are morally right. Also, the intent of that moral act is important rather than the results.

The whole argument reminds the readers to look into the moral worth of that act. In other words, morally right actions with a sense of duty are the spirit of Kant’s philosophy. The moral intent of the act must be counted to evaluate the act’s worth, unlike Utilitarianism which argues for the result. Kant provides food of thought for the present world where results matter more rather than the moral intent of the work. Universalizability, reversibility, and treating man as a means certainly create a sense of duty and deeper self-reflection among human beings. So, does Kant remain relevant for you today? Or is it Utilitarianism (discussed in the previous articles) that appeals to you more?

Unlike utilitarianism, which focuses on consequences, Kantian theory focuses on interior motivations. Discuss. 

(The writer is the author of ‘Being Good and Aaiye, Insaan Banaen’ and ‘Ethikos: Stories Searching Happiness’ and ‘Kyon’. He teaches courses on and offers training in ethics, values and behaviour. He has been the expert/consultant to UPSC, SAARC countries, Civil services Academy, National Centre for Good Governance, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Competition Commission of India (CCI), etc. He has PhD in two disciplines and has been a Doctoral Fellow in Gandhian Studies from ICSSR. His second PhD is from IIT Delhi on Ethical Decision Making among Indian Bureaucrats. He writes for the UPSC Ethics Simplified (concepts and caselets) fortnightly.)

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.

Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.

For your queries and suggestions write at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com.