Immanuel Kant argued that we should evaluate people’s actions only in terms of the principles they choose to follow and not in terms of their emotions. Why does Kant make this claim? Do you think he is right?

According to Kant, the actions a person takes can either be moral or not moral. A person's actions determine his or her moral worth. One can only be considered moral if he or she is motivated by morality, not motivated by emotions. For example, if someone helps another person because the helper finds this action enjoyable, the action of helping is not necessarily moral. Instead, only if the person has the moral value of helping others is the person truly moral. Doing good because it's fun is not necessarily moral, according to Kant.
In addition, Kant states that we should not judge the morality of one's actions on the consequences. For example, if two students intend to cheat but only one has the opportunity to see another person's paper and copy from it, the student who does not cheat is not moral. That student did not cheat only because he or she did not have the chance to do so. Therefore, it makes sense to judge others based on the principles they follow to guide their actions, rather than on their emotions (as, again, they may simply find it fun or rewarding to do good, rather than being truly ethical) or on the consequences of their actions (which are in part determined by the opportunity that they have to do good or not do good).