So good will without any qualifications is making us do what we do. Kant would say that we should not let anything but reason's guidance propel our actions. In the case of Ryan wanting to take her neighbor's flat-screen television because she can't afford one of her own a professor's salary is not acting in a moral way because Ryan obviously does not have an respect for her fellow human beings. She is not treating them with dignity, but rather she is feeling angry that she has something that she will never have. Making the excuse to take the television and give it to Big Brothers/Big Sisters is a way that Ryan is justifying her desire to steal the television.

The interesting thing about Ryan is that she believes because she is a professor who works long hours, gives lots of time to students and is a role model in the community, gives her time and money to retirement homes, gives...

Ryan's having to state everything that she does to make her a good, moral person does not make her a good, moral person.
Formulation #1: I ought to act in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law.

In the case of a person who wants to borrow some money and he promises that he will pay it back even though he knows that he won't pay it back, there is a contradiction that arises if he wills it to become a universal law. If this were a universal law, that everyone borrow money promising to pay it back but knowing they won't, then everyone would know that the person had no intention of paying it back and so nobody would offer lend money in the first place. Kant believes that everyone would simply "laugh at all such expression as vain pretenses" (31).