Categorical Imperative vs Teleology

There are moral theories that contradict teleology, and it is the categorical imperative and divine
command theory that is under deontology.

Immanuel Kant formulate categorical imperative wherein he introduced two concepts, the formulation of
universal law and the "formulation of end-in-itself”. The formulation of the universal law says that “you should
only act in a way whereby you would want everyone else in the world to act in the same way”. In other words, you
should not do things that you don’t want everyone else to do. It contradicts teleology because in that theory,
whatever your action may be, as long as it produces good consequence, it is a good action.

Like for example, something happened wherein you need to choose between lying or telling the truth. So
in categorical imperative, if you choose to lie, then everyone else has the right to lie too However, in teleology, if
you lied because you wanted to protect your colleagues then it is a good action.

The second concept formulated by Kant is the formulation of the End-in-itself. “Act in a way wherein you
treat humanity as an end-in-itself and not as a mere means.” In other words, you should never look at people like
an object; you should never treat them based on what they can give you. You shouldn’t let others benefit from
you. It contradicts teleology because what it wants us to do is we compromise for other people even if it means
taking something from ourselves just to provide them happiness or value.