Kant and The Categorical Imperative
	Kant is a Western philosopher famous for his ethical theory based on the idea that there is an overriding moral rule, so called categorical imperative, somewhat similar to the well-known Golden Rule. In support of his theory Kant has argued that such principle, if followed, would bring practical results as it can be applied to most life situations. 
	Kant has been critical of the previous ethical theories, in particular, of the so-called utilitarian theories. The moral principle of utilitarianism argues that any action should be evaluated on the basis of wellbeing or happiness produced by this action. Thus, the more happiness in more people is achieved as a consequence of this action the higher moral value should be attributed to it. Kant’s major argument against this theory was that utilitarian principle devalues the individuals it is supposed to benefit; because in the case such principle is applied, individual benefit would be viewed merely as means for achieving the greater benefit and thus, could be sacrificed. Moreover, Kant’s general argument against previous theories was viewing the achievement of human happiness and satisfaction as an ultimate goal, rather then using human logic in search for the universal moral law dictated by reason which he was advocating.
	In his work, Kant distinguishes between the autonomy and heteronomy of the will. He defines heteronymous will, as the one submitting to some external rules of action, while autonomous will would be self-imposed although commonly shared due to everyone’s mutual rational faculty.  Kant’s concepts of the will are closely connected with his formulation of the categorical imperative:
Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
	This ‘maximum’ can be understood as a person’s original intention or a fundamental principle of one’s actions. Thus, Kant implies that every individual, when making a moral decision in favor of a certain action, must be able to hold this action as a universal standard applicable to every other individual placed in similar circumstances. This way adhering to categorical imperative ultimately provides for an autonomous ethical choice since it requires a person to make self-legislating moral decision based on one’s reason.
	Kant’s theory in my opinion provides for correct ethical code, because it applies reason as an instrument for locating universal moral principle, and emphasizes individual wellbeing as its essential value. Moreover, since it instructs for the ethical decision to be derived from logic, the categorical imperative stays to be the subject for constant improvement and could recognize the emergence of a better moral principle, should such be discovered. In addition, one could support this principle with the fact that no other good feature of human nature is intrinsically good under any, not only appropriate condition, but good will, which is the essential tool of the categorical imperative principle (Kemerling, 2001).