Kant’s Groundwork of The Metaphysics of Morals, is the first book which gives me the answers of which actions absolutely has moral worth and what a type of moral law can be the maxim for our behavior.  Formerly, I consider morality as a consequence of experience, which is learnt from my elder generation or is decided by my inclination.  However, Kant shows a new view of this question, which is that morality, is decided by our good will and a good will is only because of its volition.  In order to prove this definition, Kant uses several steps to state his argument.  This essay aims to locate the use of reason to his whole moral system, summarize it and give critically analyze.

According to Kant, good will should be the source of morality and it is not forced but all volition, so we only need to act as the law which we think can also be concerned as a general law for others.  For making this idea become acceptable and practicable, Kant firstly distinguishes reason from other human’s emotions, which will be discussed mainly in this essay.  Then, only giving us the rule of acting on the basis of reason is not enough to resolve the moral worth, hence Kant supplies other two rules – the respect of law and the formulations of imperative.  In a word, the argument of reason is the first step to prove Kant’s definition of morality and to establish the whole system of his metaphysics of morals.

Next, I would like to talk about my personal understanding of Kant’s reason.  Our all emotions can be distinguished into two categorics: the first one cannot be separated from the satisfaction of all our natural needs; while the second one is merely connected with reason.  Former is the reason of desire and inclination, the happiness from which is only influenced by passion.  Later is caused by reason.  Our confusions are all come from the emotions of passion, yet the sense of morals should come from reason, which can influence will and guide it to be good.  Therefore, we are the only source of moral authority, which are realized through the use of our reason, and it will provide us with moral law.

This view is very significant because it is the basic of the whole argument.  Natural feelings neither pledge law, nor make morals practical.  The sense of morality cannot decide the law, which can only be practiced by reason.  This claim is also very challenging as most of the people think morals is on the basis of the sense of morality, which holds happiness as the only aim.  Kant opposes that standpoint.  He says: “the emotions themselves cannot be a justification for action.”  It can be understood very easily.  Different people have different emotions and feelings, so they have different senses of morals if morals are on the basis of passion.  Since passion is different for people, how can it be concerned as the standard for distinguishing right from wrong and work out a general law?  Kant’s claim of reason deciding morals makes the rest of his argument: “the concept of a will that is to be esteemed in itself”; “an action from duty has its moral worth”; “action depends upon the principle of volition” and “duty is necessity of an action from respect of law”, becomes fairly reasonable.

In conclusion, the location of the use of reason, a summary and a discussion of it have been made.  In addition, Kant emphasizes on reason does not mean that he is against the natural feelings of humans.  His argument focuses on against passion controlling morals.  He closely connects morals with our will, and turns to practically solve the problem of law.  In another word, Kant gives us a conception of what should be done and what could not be done clearly.