Moral Philosophy and Literature
In Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, the Universal Law formulation of his categorical imperative (CI) indicates that one should act according to that maxim which one can at the same time will it as a universal law of morality. I.e., roughly, in any moral situation, do only what you can at that moment rationally choose for everyone to do in that situation. The Humanity formulation of the CI is: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”
In Babbitt, Sinclair Lewis describes his main character, George F. Babbitt, in such a way that he serves as a literary example of the businessperson who violates the CI. Lewis notes that Babbitt’s real estate experience and physical appearance were enough:
“to establish him as one of the ruling caste of good fellows. Yet his eventual importance to mankind was perhaps lessened by his large and complacent ignorance of all architecture save the types of houses turned out by speculative builders … and all the commonest axioms of economics. He serenely believed that the one purpose of the real estate business was to make money for George F. Babbitt. True, it was a good advertisement at boosters’ club lunches, and all the varieties of annual banquets to which good fellows were invited, to speak sonorously of unselfish public service, the broker’s obligation to keep inviolate the trust of his clients, and a thing called Ethics, whose nature was confusing but if you had it you were a high-class realtor, and if you hadn’t you were a shyster, a piker, and a fly-by-night. These virtues awakened confidence and enabled you to handle bigger propositions. But they didn’t imply that you were to be impractical and refuse to take twice the value of a house if a buyer was such an idiot that he didn’t [negotiate] the asking price.”
This description of Babbitt fits nicely with Kant’s example of what the shopkeeper ought not to do. For Babbitt, ethics is in some cases a mere means to money-making, but in other cases, ethics is an obstacle to ripping off customers. In the former cases, Babbitt advocates ‘ethical’ behavior. In such circumstances, he is acting in accordance with duty but not from duty, since he is not acting for the sake of the moral law, but rather for the sake of his own wallet. In the latter cases, Babbitt supports the defenestration of ethics in favor of exploiting naïve customers for the sake of making big money. In such situations, he is using his customers as a mere means to his own near-term ends. Yet he is not even acting shrewdly for the sake of his own long-term interests, since home-shoppers might find out that he ripped off the buyer, thereby damaging his own reputation as a “high-class realtor,” which would probably reduce the likelihood that he receives future business from those aware of his knavish behavior.