ts with strict or narrow [perfect] irremissible) duty" (Kant 158).
Imperfect duty involves actions "in which this internal impossibility is indeed not found." Such a situation or action "conflicts only with broad [imperfect] (meritorious) duty" (Kant 158).
The perfect duty, then, is that which the reason determines to be applicable to the categorical imperative not because it will bring the actor a personal benefit, but because it fits that categorical imperative. The imperfect, or hypothetical imperative, is that which is made impure by the presence of personal benefit which will result from the action.
To Kant, reason determines duty and duty is the basis of the categorical imperative and moral action, not the results of the action or the ways in which it might benefit the individual considering what action to take. The moral action involves two requirements, that the action could become a universal law, and that in the action taken the individual wills that it become such a universal law.
Considering the question of whether to administer the Heimlich maneuver to a person who is choking on a piece of bagel, even though one dislikes the choking person, involves perfect duty based on the categorical imperative. The action to be taken, according to the categorical imperative, is to administer the Heimlich maneuver despite the fact that one does not like the person choking on the bagel.
There are a number of considerations which the individual will consider in such a situation. The self-interest of the individual would lead him not to apply the maneuver, because the result would be in his self-interest--a person he does not like will suffer by choking to death. If the person chooses not to apply the Heimlich maneuver, then, he will be acting, or failing to act, in accordance with persona
...