Act only on principles you’d let everyone follow

Alyssa decided she’d always speak out when someone made a sexist joke at work. She felt strongly that silence meant complicity. But at a teambuilding dinner, she held back—everyone else was laughing, and she feared derailing morale.

The next morning, she recalled Kant’s categorical imperative: “Act only on maxims you can will as universal law.” She reformulated her rule: “I will speak up calmly when a joke undermines someone’s dignity, respecting context and relationships.”

By testing this refined maxim in both a heated meeting and a casual coffee break, Alyssa discovered she could call out harmful humor with a quick, private remark instead of a public confrontation. Her colleagues nodded, and later thanked her.

Kant wasn’t prescribing rigid anger management—he was teaching us that our actions gain moral weight when they could be universalized. Thought experiments in modern ethics confirm that people are more receptive to feedback when it’s framed as upholding a shared principle rather than personal criticism.

You’ve drafted a personal maxim, tested its universal implications, and refined it to respect real-world relationships and context. Now each time you face a moral choice, run your rule through the “universal test” and ask: Would I want everyone to do this? If the answer’s yes, proceed; if not, tweak your approach until it’s a maxim everyone can share. Give it a whirl at your next team chat.