When Kant presents his theory of moral judgment, he discusses both hypothetical and categorical imperatives. What is the difference between the two? Kant tells us that in his way of seeing things, doing the right thing is a categorical imperative (Do what's right!), not a hypothetical one. Kant has several different formulations of his "Categorical Imperative," one of which may be paraphrased as "act only according to that [subjective or personal] maxim whereby you can, at one and the same time, will that it should become a universal law." What does Kant mean here? Explain Kant's position as it relates to or contrasts with consequentialist ethics and ethical relativism. Do you agree with the accepted characterization of Kant's view as a nonconsequentialist theory? What is your position with respect to Kant's view? Does he get it right? Explain and defend your view and use at least one specific example to illustrate your position.