Morality does not need religion as its ground “So far as morality is based upon the conception

of man as a free agent who, just because he is free, binds himself through his reason

to unconditioned laws, it stands in need neither of the idea of another Being over him, for

him to apprehend his duty, nor of an incentive other than the law itself, for him to do his duty.

At least it is man's own fault if he is subject to such a need; and if he is, this

need can be relieved through nothing outside himself: for whatever does not originate in

himself and his own freedom in no way compensates for the deficiency of his morality.

Hence for its own sake morality does not need religion at all (whether objectively, as regards

willing, or subjectively, as regards ability [to act]); by virtue of pure practical reason

it is self-sufficient.”

Interpretation Kant tells us here that morality comes from

man's freedom and reason, as the free choice of a rational being to bind himself by the

moral law he learns from his reason.

Since this freedom and this reason are the sole grounds of the moral law, we require

the existence of God neither (a) for the discovery of our duties, nor (b) for incentive or motivation

to do our duty.

That is, divine revelation is not necessary for us to know the moral law (e.g., we do

not need the Ten Commandments to know that stealing is wrong) and the incentives and

disincentives of heaven and hell are not necessary for us to have sufficient motivation to perform

our duty.

Revelation might serve as a crutch for morality in civilizations or individuals who lack the

full development of moral reason, but this is a deficient and hopefully temporary situation.

Both objectively and subjectively, morality does not need religion.

It proceeds from pure practical reason.