Immanuel Kant is one of the greatest moral theorists of the eighteenth century. He is the mind behind the moral theory, which is aptly named after him, Kantian Deontology. His moral theory "is widely considered the most important and influential of all deontological theories" (Burnor and Raley). It has many attractive aspects, but it is not perfect. Two attractive qualities of Kant's moral theory are that it aims at true (and logical) universality and the principle of ends. But, as stated before, Kantian deontology is not perfect. Two unattractive qualities are the fact that Kant does not take into account the consequences that arise from a certain morality and the "objection of the rational agent" (Burnor and Raley). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The universality of one's morality is high on the list of "attractive qualities" of Kantian deontology. He uses the term maxim to refer to “a rule of conduct or behavior according to which one may act in conformity” (Burnor and Raley). When it comes to the foundations of the universality of morality, Kant's “strategy is to let the morality of an act depend on whether one can make rational sense of whether that act is established as a universal practice” (Burnor and Raley). The best way to demonstrate how a maxim is rational enough to be universalized is to apply it to a simple concept like lying. Can lying be universalized? The answer would be "no" because the purpose of lying is to deceive someone (whether it's a large or small deception) and if lying were a regular daily maxim, then everyone would know they were deceived. Which simply defeats the purpose. Related to this, an observation that arose from Kant's study of the universality of morality is that “every person has the same moral value, it follows that every person deserves exactly the same degree of respect” (Burnor and Raley). Reading this the golden rule may come to mind, but it's not the same thing. The rational sense of universalizing a maxim is what differentiates Kant's belief from the golden rule. The thing to remember about Kant's purpose is that he wants to try to show how moral principles can arise from reason. An additional detail that makes universality attractive is that it addresses utilitarianism's weakness of not even having universalism. The Principle of Ends is another attractive quality of Kantian deontology. In essence, the ends principle is “Act so as to treat everyone affected by your action (including yourself) as an end and never just as a means” (Burnor and Raley). Intrinsic value is essential and should be taken into consideration when dealing with the principle of ends. Honestly, this principle can be a little confusing if you don't know Kant's definition of "means" and "end." In this case, the "means" is commonly defined as a tool or even a way to achieve one's goal at some cost. Then there's the "end," which is the goal you're trying to reach. According to the authors of the book, “Kant's principle of ends offers us profound moral insight” (Burnor and Raley). The best example used to demonstrate this principle is Al's dishonest treatment of Mrs. Satzoner (the customer) in the book. Long story short, Al lies to Mrs. Satzoner that the SUV he is trying to purchase is in "prime condition" (Burnor and Raley), in order to finalize the sale of the SUV. Al obviously knows the history of the vehicle, including all the problems it has, and is hiding a transmission leak in the SUV so he can avoid.