Q&A: The Proof from Morality and the Categorical Imperative
The Proof from Morality and the Categorical Imperative
Question
Hello Rabbi,
In the fourth notebook, the Rabbi presents the proof from morality as an answer to the question of who determines which values are good and which are not. After that, the Rabbi presents the proof according to Kant. But seemingly Kant answers that question through the categorical imperative. That is, a good value is one that passes the test of the imperative. Why does he need an objective standard beyond that? Is it correct to say that he is looking for a basis for the validity of the imperative itself, or am I missing something here in my understanding?
Answer
Indeed. Kant only shows that if there is in fact a moral command, then its form is necessarily categorical (an unconditional command), and its content is the categorical imperative in his formulation: act in such a way that you would want your actions to be a universal law. But in his analysis he assumes that there is such a command and that one must obey it, and he seeks to identify what that command is and what its nature is. What is the basis of the command’s validity, and why should one obey it, are different questions, and the analysis of the categorical imperative does not answer them. The proof from morality (including Kant’s version) deals with those questions.