Goodwill...i love that store!!!

I believe that Kant is very logical when it comes to his perspective of ethics. When anyone is asked why they did something, they answer because it was the right thing to do. When asked what the right thing to do is, the response is usually what I am suppose to do, thus duty. Duty needs not any emotions and therefore cannot be put in the same category with intent. How do we judge what is good? Kant also believes in the maxim and if such a law can be applied to everyone (like physics) then it would be the case that such a law is right to do. We cannot separate ourselves from the laws of physics because they are principles, without our control, govern our lives. Even though you can choose to act against rational behavior and be immoral, you cannot do things outside of reason and still be correct in calling yourself a reasonable human being. I would like to propose that if it is the case that being a reasonable individual also allows you be a moral on, because being the opposite would mean immorality, then the Good Human being is the one of duty. For if the goodwill is duty and goodwill is unconditional and good within itself, then so is she/he that does their duty. Such a person would be the model human for all and would walk in the way of a person not ruled by emotion, although having them, but by living according to the natural world. The only flaw I have with Kant is that emotion or perhaps intuition has no necessary logic and yet can save lives. In class it wouldn't make since for Dr. J to not give poisonous donuts to the homeless. by goodwill, she would've been obligated to feed the needy, but intuition would've saved the homeless. Duty, if taken by a righteous idiot, can be manipulated to case unrighteous harm. although the goodwill will not be blamed, the soul of the good man will forever be unbalanced.