Kant is saying your actions, based on good will, can apply to all; so that good moral judgments made can become universal for everyone. Kant believed a person’s motive, his intentions of an action are what decides if the action is morally right or wrong—not the end result of that action or decision. Kant’s categorical imperative approach says a person has the moral duty to do what is right, because it is the right thing to do, not because it may benefit them. If a person’s actions or decisions will contradict those maxims, then the action should not be taken.
I agree with Kant’s theory that a person’s motive is what makes a person’s action morally right or wrong. The end result or consequence of a person’s action or decision to say or do something does not constitute morality—how you got there in the first place is what matters. Some end results do not always turn out the way we want them to, but if the intention of the action is morally right, how can you judge it as being wrong. The actions of people who lie, cheat or steal as a way to get what they want are not morally right; they are using other people as a means to their end. When you decide to act or react to a situation you need to ask yourself, “Would it be okay if everyone did what I am about to say or do?” If the answer is yes, then your motive was based on a good moral decision. I believe it is our duty to do the right thing, as this gives humanity a solid foundation to build on its rules and principles.