Kant, Sartre and the actions of man.
             Kant's idea of what is good, moral and correct dramatically differentiates from that of Sartre's. Sartre states no action taken by man can be evil. No matter what the action, in some way it must serve some benefit apart from his very own. Sartre believes that man comes into existence before his essence, instead of essence preceding man. Kant's categorical imperative and idea of good will opposes Sartre's idea. Kant states that the only good thing that actually exists is good will, while others thing's can be qualified as good, but are not.
             "..in creating the man that we want to be, there is not a single one of our acts which does not at the same time create and image of man as we think he ought to be. To choose to be this or that is to affirm at the same time the value of what we choose, because we can never choose evil. We always choose the good, and nothing can be good for us without being good for all."
             To fully understand Sartre's idea's about morality we must start from the very begging, and the idea that Sartre is an existentialist. Existentialism it the belief that man comes first and then comes his essence. As Sartre defines it "existence precedes essence". Sartre uses an example of a paper cutter. He says that before making a paper cutter the creator has an idea of what he wants to make. He creates a plane of how it is going to look and what function the paper cutter is going to perform. Thus he says in the case of the paper cutter essence of the paper cutter preceded its existence. "Thus, the paper cutter is at once an object produced in a certain way and, on the other hand one having specific use". The function and form of the paper cutter was planned and come before the actual creation of the paper cutter.
             Many philosophers wrestle with the idea of God, and the idea that God creates us in some image and with a...