It is not the rewards of a job well done; it is the principle that the job should be done well, because that is what is good and right. Kant does acknowledge that it is sometimes difficult to judge whether or not an action has been done out of duty, because often the immediate inclination to an action could be for either duty or personal gain, and the means through which one executes the action can often follow the same paths. Yet it remains that that action can have no moral worth unless it was done from the motive of duty, and not just in conformity with it. .
At this point he discus's how duty and goodwill play out in our culture. Kant says, "Duty is the necessity to act out of reverence for the law." (Kant pg. 99) If one aims to achieve something as a result of their actions then they can only have inclination, but never reverence, therefore they cannot be acting with a sense of duty, and by that cannot and do not possess goodwill. The loyalty to the law because it is law also plays an important part here. When an action is done from duty it is essential for one remain completely focused on the act of obeying the law. If one allows themselves to focus too much on the possible negative outcomes then the chances of a person suffering from derelictions in duty in order to mold the outcome to more pleasing results begin to interfere with the principle of volition, which was originally solely out of duty and reverence for the law. .
Hilden 3.
Basically the law must be obeyed at all costs, and regardless of how that obedience will affect you, no matter how severe. With this Kant goes on to state that the moral worth of an action has no relation to the result expected from it. This is because we can never tell whether the results were based only on the actions or if possible outside factors were an influence. So, "consequently their production did not require the will of a rational being, in which, however, the highest and unconditioned good can alone be found.
