An unfair assessment of motives

This week in our philosophy class we’re discussing Kant and Groundwork for the Metaphysics of morals. The Grounding for the Metaphysics of morals focuses on moral and how to develop a clearer understanding of moral principles so that we, as moral agent may avert distractions. In the book, Kant gives three duties or deontological moral principal. They are as follow; An Agent actions are moral if and only if undertaken for the sake of morality (which means it can’t be with motives) An agent moral quality of an actions are not based upon the action’s consequences, rather according to the motive in which it creates. Agent actions are moral if and only if morals are taken out of respect for the moral law (it can’t be based upon desire). What Kant is saying is that moral principles must have absolute validity and independent of all circumstances.  

While I do I agree with Kant deontological principal morals, i have an issue with the 1^st principal in term motives. I think it’s unfair to judge every agent moral actions based upon motives. I think there’s such a thing as good and bad motives.  For instance here at CBU students go out into communities and get involved in community services. In that comes an immense amount of attentions that they probably never wanted. This to me is the bad motive.  However, community service also helps students in long run. In term of a resume, it helps students build their future. Also, Aristotle may argue that It would help students acquired an ethical virtue. I like to think that this is good motive. It wasn’t based off the desire of one to gain but in which both the community and the student gained.  Again, I do agree with Kant duty principals but I just think it’s unfair to say all motives are just motives. It may be crazy but it just my thoughts and opinion.