Hobbes Vs Kant

In the idea of human nature and reasons; we can indeed perceive a modern philosophy and ethics, by monitoring a reflection of insightful philosophers of Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant. In this regard, however, Hobbes and Kant’s are differing in so many ways as they have entirely different perspective on the issue of morality and pragmatism. This disparity can be viewed, by how Kant's view morality in more of a rationalistic way, while Hobbes being more empirical on the topic of ethics.Therefore, they both took a person-centered approach to a given issue, as Kant’s philosophy is concerned with the moral law an unwritten rule to govern individual actions, yet Hobbes theory emphasis more on ethical egoism, by mentioning human nature based mostly
By arguing along these lines, Kant’s put a huge emphasis on will and acting according to what is right, rather than what is to be good, for the reason that, “ good will” is a driving force of morality and qualification. Kant understood that conduct of moral action needs to be somehow adapted to Universal law, as every human being need to be treated equitably according to the Moral law and whoever find themselves in the same situation, wold act the same way. In that manner, the self-interest is not a factor in the Kantian understanding of Morality, as he strongly suggests that if the action requires injustice, it needs to be set aside and be labeled as an immoral act. In that sense, there is a moral obligation for an individual to be in-line with the law and do not take advantage of other human beings. For instance, if doing a heroic act, such as battling in the war would negatively impact an innocent people, then it is an irrational act for individuals to engage themselves in these type of situation, for which they are dismantling the moral law. Kant concludes that “Always recognize that human individuals are ends, and do not use them as means to your end”(Kant,