Eichmann and Kant

First off I should probably say that I don't want to frighten anyone off with the topic of Eichmann. I don't want this to be an off topic post which of course is something that I find is easy to do when thinking about Eichmann and the Nazis. I think that it with all the talk about Kant that it would be a good idea to try and explain why Eichmann misunderstands Kant. At the outset Kant should be absolved of any suggest that he might have in any way agreed with Eichmann. In actuality Kant would have been appalled to hear Eichmann claim to be motivated by his writings. Kant’s categorical imperative was twisted by Eichmann. The categorical imperative states that a person should act in such a way that the maxim of their actions could become a universal law. Eichmann stated that his understanding of the categorical imperative was that a person should act in such a way that the fuehrer knew of their actions that he would approve of them. This is a complete misunderstanding of Kant; the whole point of Kant’s categorical imperative is that people need to think for themselves. The basic idea of the categorical imperative is that we each need to decide if our actions could become a universal law. Obviously we can’t justify killing others because we ourselves would not wish to be killed. Eichmann instead of making this determination himself instead shifted all responsibility onto the Fuehrer Hitler. Instead of deciding for himself he instead has explicitly abrogated his ability to do that. This is ridiculous because the whole point of the categorical imperative is for people to think beyond their own personal wants and desires and think about the larger ramifications of their actions and the precedents that they are setting. When a person substitutes the wants and desires of another human for their own conscience they aren’t making any philosophical progress, they are instead just attempting to pin the effects of their own wants and desires onto someone else. I’m not sure if I’m making much sense with this but essentially the substitution of Hitler’s prerogatives for Eichmann’s, is not in any sense of the term a use of the categorical imperative. It’s just a substitution of one faulty judgment for another as opposed to any sort of real consideration of morals and ethics. The categorical imperative as Kant outlines it is supposed to make a person self reflective and thoughtful. The categorical imperative as Eichmann misunderstands merely denies the need for any thought and reflection at all. I realize that this is not a controversial post but I just felt that it was important to address specifically why Eichmann was flawed in his claim to have been following Kant's teachings.