contains no condition by which it is limited, nothing remains over but the generality of a law in
general, to which the maxim of the actions is to be conformable, and which conforming alone
presents the imperative as necessary. Therefore the categorical imperative is a single one, and in
fact this: Act only according to a maxim by which you can at the same time will that it shall
become a general law." Or: "Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will
a general natural law."
Kant gives as an illustration of the working of the categorical imperative that it is wrong to borrow
money, because if we all tried to do so there would be no money left to borrow. One can in like
manner show that theft and murder are condemned by the categorical imperative. But there are
some acts which Kant would certainly think wrong but which cannot be shown to be wrong by his
principles, for instance suicide; it would be quite possible for a melancholic to wish that
everybody should commit suicide. His maxim seems, in fact, to give a necessary but not a
sufficient criterion of virtue. To get a sufficient criterion, we should have to abandon Kant's purely
formal point of view, and take some account of the effects of actions. Kant, however, states
emphatically that virtue does not depend upon the intended result of an action, but only on the
principle of which it is itself a result; and if this is conceded, nothing more concrete than his
maxim is possible.
Kant maintains, although his principle does not seem to entail this consequence, that we ought so
to act as to treat every man as an end in himself. This may be regarded as an abstract form of the
doctrine of the rights of man, and it is open to the same objections. If taken seriously, it would
make it impossible to reach a decision whenever two people's interests conflict. The difficulties
are particularly obvious in political philosophy, which requires some principle, such as preference
for the majority, by which the interests of some can, when necessary, be sacrificed to those of
others. If there is to be any ethic of government, the end of government must be one, and the only
single end compatible with justice is the good of the community. It is possible, however, to
interpret Kant's principle as meaning, not that each man is an absolute end, but that all men should
count equally in determining actions by which many are affected. So interpreted, the