Kant’s Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, provide written answers to the following questions.  Please give complete answers in complete sentences.

1. According to Kant, what is the only thing which can be considered good without qualification, and why?

2. What argument from human nature does Kant provide to establish that happiness is not the end of human life?

3. How does Kant contrast actions contrary to duty, actions in accord with duty but done from inclination, and actions done from duty?  What is Kant trying to establish about the moral worth of action, and what is the argument?

4. How does Kant interpret the biblical command to love one’s neighbor and even one’s enemy?

 5. What does Kant mean by “duty”?  What is the difference between duty and prudence? 

 6. What test does Kant propose to determine whether a proposed course of action is consistent with duty?  How does this test follow from his concept of duty? 

 Second half of questions same topic:

Why, according to Kant, can the concept of duty he has sketched not be derived from experience?

Why, according to Kant, can morality not be derived from examples?  Why, for instance, is the example of Jesus Christ not sufficient?

What is the difference between what Kant calls the practical good and the pleasant, and how is this distinction relevant to the concept of an imperative?

What is the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives?  What are the two kinds of hypothetical imperatives and how are they distinguished?

What is Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative (the formula of universal law), and how does he arrive at it?

What four types of duties do Kant’s four examples illustrate, and how does each of them demonstrate the application of the categorical imperative in its first formulation?

What is Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative (the formula of the end-in-itself), and how does he arrive at it?  How does each of Kant’s four examples demonstrate the application of the categorical imperative in its second formulation?