Final answer:
Kant distinguishes between hypothetical imperatives, which are goal-oriented and not necessarily moral, and categorical imperatives, which are universal moral laws we must follow. He argues moral requirements are categorical because they are grounded in reason and guide our actions in a universally consistent and ethical way.
Step-by-step explanation:
Understanding Kant's Imperatives
Immanuel Kant distinguished between two types of imperatives: hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are conditional and oriented towards achieving a specific goal, such as 'study hard to get good grades'. These are subjective and not tied to morality.
On the other hand, Kant believed that moral requirements fall into the category of categorical imperatives. These are universal moral laws derived by reason, requiring actions that one should perform regardless of desires or consequences. Kant's categorical imperative is famously captured in the maxim: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law." This approach to ethics is part of the deontological tradition, focusing on the inherent rightness of actions rather than their consequences. Kant thought adherence to categorical imperatives was essential because they are the norms of rational conduct and ethical progress.
Essentially, for Kant, a categorical imperative is what one must do, while a hypothetical imperative is what one can do to achieve an end. The significance of Kant's division lies in his belief in reason's power to determine ethical behavior that could, in theory, lead to an improved society with universal laws that treat all individuals as ends in themselves.