Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

Analytic and synthetic distinction refer to types of human judgment that help us understand if something is true or false. Analytic distinctions support our intuitive understanding of whether an idea is true or false. People can engage with them without any specific experiences. This means, grammatically speaking, the predicate describes the subject. An example of analytic distinction is: “Children are young,” because the predicate (are) connects to an objective fact about children. Someone can understand children are young without any hands-on experience with them.

Conversely, synthetic distinction requires additional context before it can be considered true or false. This context is usually gained from direct experience with an idea. Grammatically speaking, synthetic distinction means the predicate adds to our understanding of the subject. An example of synthetic distinction is: “Children enjoy candy,” because the predicate (enjoy) describes a quality that could be the case for some children, but not all of them. Someone would have to confirm this idea by directly observing children eating candy.

Kant’s descriptions of analytic and synthetic distinction connect to his ideas about a posteriori and a priori cognition. He wanted to know if it was possible for people to establish a synthetic a priori conception of morality.

Imperatives, or commands, can be classified as categorical or hypothetical. A categorical imperative is a command you must follow in all circumstances. Conversely, hypothetical imperatives are commands for achieving a specific outcome. For example, I might tell a student wanting to understand philosophy that they ought to study hard and read works from a variety of scholars. However, this imperative only holds true for someone with that specific goal. Kant argues that if there is a universal moral law, it would have to be a categorical imperative because humans often try to be moral for its own sake. People often follow hypothetical imperatives for self-centered reasons, which means they can occasionally be immoral.

Empiricism and rationality are two philosophical schools of thought Kant references throughout his work. Empirical philosophy states we understand the world through experience, whereas rational philosophy asserts we understand it intuitively. Kant argues that all humans are rational beings.

Something that is an end in itself has inherent worth regardless of what purpose it serves or role it plays in society. Kant believes that rational beings (humans) are ends in themselves, and they are treated as such in a moral society.

The kingdom of ends is an ideal community where every member recognizes each other as rational beings with self-legislating wills and as ends in themselves. Kant believes human beings can reach the kingdom of ends if they all commit to acting morally in accordance with the categorical imperative.

A maxim is a person’s motivation for acting in a certain way. In Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant argues that maxims can determine if a person is acting morally.