What Is Kant's Categorical Imperative

What makes Immanuel Kant’s theory of moral so interesting is that it uses logical reasoning. He does not believe a set of rules that come from a divine being are correct or even come close to being right that reasoning can achieve. Why should something that claims to be all knowing create a sort of commandments if that being knows that not all humans will follow those codes of conduct? A part of Kant’s theory that intrigues me is his categorical imperative, and the two well know formulations of it. The first formulation basically states that any action that takes place should only happen if it can become a universal law. If the action becomes a universal law and it leads to a logical contradiction, then it fails the test and is not morally permissible.
If everyone started to break in, it would only cause havoc and nothing good comes out of it. The second formulation states that humans should never merely be a means to an end and be only used for an end. It’s ok to use someone for an end, but never abuse that person along the way. Look at these two formulations from the categorical imperative, it prevents bad deeds from happening, but does it also help people and promote good deeds as well? The world does not function by only becoming neutral in a lot of situations since it only leads to more problems along the way because of not choosing sides whether good or bad. In fact, the world would be better off by doing better, and Kant’s categorical imperative allows that to happen. The first and second formulation of the categorical imperative does encourage people to do good