I need some assistance with these assignment. empirical enquiry and critical thought Thank you in advance for the help! Using the rule of categorical imperative Kant suggested we therefore dare to give our promise, because there is still value in it, as tantamount to how we think and make our choice. We make promises because we think we have to fulfill them. We therefore have the positive choice to accomplish what we need to accomplish based on what we have promised. This is a remarkable indication of a good will if we want to come to consider the whole idea of Kant concerning the ethics associated with duty. For Kant, in understanding the moral requirements, it is important that we act not out of inclination, but out of duty because doing so the latter is inherent of a good will. The work at hand considers some thoughts how might Kant’s example of the ‘promise’ be useful in contemporary society together with the theory linked to this and how this might have meaningful application in modern day event. Moral Law A false promise therefore according to Kant is a contradiction to the moral law, but what makes it a significant conflict is not the associated consequence, but the way on how people think and make choices (Kerstein, 2004, p.168. Jecker, 2011, p.151). Kant believed that there is moral law that governs standard of rationality leading us to the implementation of moral requirements. In line with this moral law, irrational acts are therefore leading mankind to immorality. I agree with the idea of Kant and in the same way as how Locke and Hobbes, the other philosophers argued that the standard of rationality paves the way for moral requirements (De La Sierra, 2012, p.270. Morris, 1999, p.185. Paul et al., 2008, p.223). Understanding the idea of Kant leads me to the thought that he has a good point why he argued that we should not look at the consequence of an action, but rather on the actual intention prior to doing it. Suppose a business man owed a debt to a business partner and signed a promissory note to pay the actual cash incurred at a specified time and amount. This business man has a principle that he could just get around his obligation by adhering to a ‘false promise’ and continue to generate financial gain out of it. The key idea in this given example concerns whether the business man who is indebted to pay is living under the principle of moral law. Certainly, the man’s false promise is out of inclination and not out of duty. If all would make a false promise to make advantage of it, there would certainly come a time that everyone would not take promise seriously. In other words, the business man’s ultimate principle is a contradiction itself, because he could never gain from it, as the ultimate point of his inclination in the first place. In this case, if we based it on the idea of Kant, it is not the consequence that would tell us about a morally important thing, but the business person’s way of thinking, something invisible, but essential in understanding the moral law. Garrett (2006) showed that the ‘categorical imperative,’ just as how Kant explained would make it possible for us to understand the moral law. Duty of Ethics We can only generate general or substantial understanding of Kant’s example of promise if we come to consider his theory of the Duty of Ethics.