Ursinus Intro Ethics Blog - Section A

Kant’s argument for the formula for universal law makes sense throughout most of his argument. He gives valid points for how people make decisions and through rationality and I agree with how every human can pick his or her own standards for what decisions are “good” choices. What I can’t agree with is Kant’s statement that a person should “act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” This idea states that the rules that a person creates for themselves must also be applied universally to all humans. I don’t see the logical reasoning behind this assumption that proves it must be true. If all humans are autonomous and can therefore create their own standards and rules, how does that lead to the conclusion that any rule created must also become a universal law? The only way that I can see this as being true is if it follows somehow from everyone always acting rationally, therefore if everyone acted rationally, one person’s rules could then become universal laws. But in presenting the idea that everyone acts rationally in the same way if they are in the same circumstances, it says that there are a set of actions that all humans should follow for every possible situation. If this is the case, humans are then not autonomous and can not create their own set of rules, which Kant initially states in his argument. I think that Kant’s logic here is somewhat circular in that proving his point that all humans would act the same way if acting rational in the same circumstances takes away from his initial premise that humans are autonomous beings with reason and their own rationality.