I provide a new interpretation of maxims across Kant's corpus and argue that properly understanding the Kantian maxim can help us re-evaluate the viability of the Categorical Imperative.

I defend my view that FUL is the source of Kant's account of virtue as well as his account of permissible action and explain how FUL can be used to derive the paradigmatic duties of virtue.

I argue that Kant's understanding of the relationship between blame and permissibility has been systematically misunderstood. The Formula of Universal Law is usually understood as a permissibility criterion that relies on our intentions. But that interpretation relies on an anachronistic understanding of Kant's maxims. I argue that FUL instead tests general descriptions of action to derive general duties.