Morals are a complex issue because they are subject to individuals. There is no clear definition of things that are immoral and those that are not because most things that appear to be moral do not completely follow the rules of morality. Common rational knowledge that is related to morality is a very expound topic that can be best grouped into either material or formal (Kant, 1). The former looks into circumstances and experiences while the latter is basically logic. Why people decide to take action A and not B while both actions appear to be morally acceptable rides in the logical look of the actor. On the other hand, material knowledge is guided by the social and environmental features that surround the person carrying out the actions. Therefore, there is no logic with empirical look since there are no prior experiences that guide the actions.
Moral laws are supposed to be developed in a manner that is very concise and accommodating all the people that it would affect. It would not be easy to determine whether a law such as “though shall not kill” would be morally acceptable because it would eventually depend on the prevailing circumstances (Kant, 2). Whether one decides to kill and everyone appreciates the decision would be entirely decided by the social circumstances and the positive effects that would be brought as result of defying the law. It is therefore not very easy to decide on the metaphysics of morals with ever prevailing condition. The popular moral philosophy therefore becomes complex on how it has developed. There have been fewer explanations that attempt to explain the circumstances under which the laws would be disregarded and when the laws should be fully followed and executed. It should not at any cost follow man’s prior knowledge because that would change its whole meaning.
The parts discussed above brings the critique of the practical reasons that would lead someone to take an action that has been restricted by the moral law, yet he at times emerge as a hero. The same society that sets that law celebrates its breaker. This fully rests on the purity of the law and its independence. Once other ideas are pumped into the law, it does cease to become a logical law. It is therefore vital that we closely try to learn the process through which the morals were developed (Kant, 2). This is because at times we may pick the wrong paths and eventually fail the society.
To ensure that there are less confusion and contradictions with regard to the issue of morality, it can be said that the acts that are considered moral, and please the largest number of people could be used to set the standards of moral law. Otherwise, it would be very difficult to define the morality of a population and the rules that a given society should follow. The most fundamental thing that should not be ignored in the action of a person is the reason why they decide to do something.
The issues of principle of morality would be complex if discussed and could lead to the emergence of new issues that could raise new topics (Kant, 3). It should be studied without interference and reference to other studies because any attempt to include other issues to explain morality would eventually water down its purity and a whole new meaning and understanding would be developed (Kant, 3). Further, the discussions regarding the issue of morality should be left to people who have decided to specialize there. This is important just as people in other professions do have division of labor (Kant, 1). When people do not have a distinct role and can do anything, there emerges many mixtures and confusions. This should be avoided in the morality issues.