, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE ONLY
2. EVALUATE USING KANT'S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE (We've done the first two
stages for you)
1. Evaluate Using Kant's Categorical Imperative
Step 3: Is the maxim above conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law?
No, this maxim is not conceivable. A world where every one of the 8.1 billion people successfully
accumulates US$ 4.2 billion is economically and logically impossible. As the course material
illustrates, the Earth's resources are finite, and the global average Ecological Footprint is already
unsustainably high at approximately 2.6 hectares per person compared to the available 1.8 hectares
(SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 82). This universal wealth would require a consumption level that is
physically unattainable. Furthermore, the value of money is relative; if everyone were a billionaire,
the currency would become worthless, making the very concept of being "really, really rich"
meaningless. Therefore, the maxim fails the test of conceivability, and as Kant (1785) argued, we
have a perfect duty to refrain from acting on it. Thomas Piketty (2014), in his seminal work Capital
in the Twenty-First Century, demonstrates that such extreme wealth concentration is not only
economically unsustainable but also historically abnormal, driven by a rate of return on capital that
consistently exceeds economic growth (r > g), leading to ever-increasing inequality that cannot be
universalized.
Step 4: Would you rationally act on the maxim above in such a world?
No, I would not rationally act on this maxim. In a world where every person was a billionaire, the
concept of wealth would lose all meaning. The purpose of the maxim—to be exceptionally
wealthy—would be self-defeating, as a universal rule would make it impossible for anyone to feel
"really, really rich." The incentive to accumulate such wealth would vanish. As the study guide
explains, this is an example of a maxim that fails Kant's test of rational willing, leading to what he
described as an imperfect duty not to act on it (SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 31). Zygmunt Bauman
(2013) argues in Liquid Modernity that wealth in a consumer society is fundamentally about relative
status and distinction, not absolute numbers. When everyone possesses the same level of wealth, the
status function of wealth evaporates, making the action irrational.
2. EVALUATE USING KANT'S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE (We've done the first two
stages for you)
1. Evaluate Using Kant's Categorical Imperative
Step 3: Is the maxim above conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law?
No, this maxim is not conceivable. A world where every one of the 8.1 billion people successfully
accumulates US$ 4.2 billion is economically and logically impossible. As the course material
illustrates, the Earth's resources are finite, and the global average Ecological Footprint is already
unsustainably high at approximately 2.6 hectares per person compared to the available 1.8 hectares
(SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 82). This universal wealth would require a consumption level that is
physically unattainable. Furthermore, the value of money is relative; if everyone were a billionaire,
the currency would become worthless, making the very concept of being "really, really rich"
meaningless. Therefore, the maxim fails the test of conceivability, and as Kant (1785) argued, we
have a perfect duty to refrain from acting on it. Thomas Piketty (2014), in his seminal work Capital
in the Twenty-First Century, demonstrates that such extreme wealth concentration is not only
economically unsustainable but also historically abnormal, driven by a rate of return on capital that
consistently exceeds economic growth (r > g), leading to ever-increasing inequality that cannot be
universalized.
Step 4: Would you rationally act on the maxim above in such a world?
No, I would not rationally act on this maxim. In a world where every person was a billionaire, the
concept of wealth would lose all meaning. The purpose of the maxim—to be exceptionally
wealthy—would be self-defeating, as a universal rule would make it impossible for anyone to feel
"really, really rich." The incentive to accumulate such wealth would vanish. As the study guide
explains, this is an example of a maxim that fails Kant's test of rational willing, leading to what he
described as an imperfect duty not to act on it (SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 31). Zygmunt Bauman
(2013) argues in Liquid Modernity that wealth in a consumer society is fundamentally about relative
status and distinction, not absolute numbers. When everyone possesses the same level of wealth, the
status function of wealth evaporates, making the action irrational.
