Kant vs. Nietzsche One of the most fundamental questions in philosophy is what the most important thing we are looking for is and what effects it has on our lives. There are different views related to such a fundamental question. The treatment of people is the question of morality. We are going to take a look at positions taken by great German philosophers Kant and Nietzsche on the question of morality and the way people should be treated, based on their arguments presented in theories developed by them. Kant’s philosophy is based on the assumption that there is a metaphysical dimension which implies that there are some absolute things that do exist outside of human beings and which are the ends in themselves (not intended to promote an achievement of any other end). Kant calls these abstract absolute things the categorical imperative. The categorical imperative in his view is something that is not dependent on anything else and, therefore, should be something that we should strive for. The concept of the categorical imperative is important because we can use it to determine whether our actions are being moral through the application of the universal law, which implies the categorical imperative. The universal law says that we should never act except in such a way that we can also will that our maxim should become a universal law. The whole system of Kant’s morality is based on the assumption that there is an autonomous will, which is the source of moral action and decision-making. Kant refers to it as a good will, which can be regarded as good without qualification, because it is good only through its willing, i.e., it is good in itself. According to this, here arises an interesting point that explains how Kant’s system of morality affects society and its norms, including very important question of relationships among people and whether these relationships