In Kantian ethics, decisions are guided by which type of command that applies universally?

In Kantian ethics, decisions are guided by which type of command that applies universally?

• A. Hypothetical imperative
• B. Categorical imperative
• C. Utilitarian calculation
• D. Ethical egoism

Answer: (B)

The key idea being tested is how Kantian ethics grounds moral guidance in commands that apply to all rational beings, regardless of personal desires. In Kant’s view, a decision is morally right only if it can be willed as a universal law—a categorical imperative. This means the rule behind your action must hold in every situation and for every person, independent of any particular goal or wish. This universality is what makes the command unconditional. For example, if your maxim is “I may lie whenever it benefits me,” you would have to be willing for everyone to act on that rule. If everyone lied when convenient, trust and communication would break down, and the very possibility of that action would be undermined. Since such a universalization fails, the action isn’t morally permissible. Other options don’t fit because they tie moral worth to outcomes or desires rather than universal rational duty. A hypothetical imperative depends on a specific outcome you want, not on a universal law. Utilitarian calculation judges actions by their consequences and overall happiness, which is a different ethical approach. Ethical egoism centers on self-interest, again not on universal moral law.

The key idea being tested is how Kantian ethics grounds moral guidance in commands that apply to all rational beings, regardless of personal desires. In Kant’s view, a decision is morally right only if it can be willed as a universal law—a categorical imperative. This means the rule behind your action must hold in every situation and for every person, independent of any particular goal or wish.

This universality is what makes the command unconditional. For example, if your maxim is “I may lie whenever it benefits me,” you would have to be willing for everyone to act on that rule. If everyone lied when convenient, trust and communication would break down, and the very possibility of that action would be undermined. Since such a universalization fails, the action isn’t morally permissible.

Other options don’t fit because they tie moral worth to outcomes or desires rather than universal rational duty. A hypothetical imperative depends on a specific outcome you want, not on a universal law. Utilitarian calculation judges actions by their consequences and overall happiness, which is a different ethical approach. Ethical egoism centers on self-interest, again not on universal moral law.