Kant claims to have discovered a categorical imperative, a moral requirement that we have reason to follow regardless of what we happen to desire. can people have reasons for action that are completely independent of their desires?

The best dominant part of a man's activities depend on their wants, yet saying this doesn't imply that those wants won't ever struggle or even that they would dependably be certain or advantageous to the individual settling on the decision. A man who feels they must choose between limited options will probably mean they don't care for any of the decisions accessible, yet they will at last act in whichever way their wants control them, conceivably guiding them toward the lessor of two saw shades of malice. Notwithstanding doing nothing is a decision in view of the longing to not pick. A definitive decision numerous have made is to incline toward discipline, even to incorporate passing, instead of whatever option was displayed. Be that as it may, it is workable for the activities of a man to be outside of their wants, for example when a man isn't in their legitimate attitude. There are substances and medicinal conditions,  liquor, opiates, sleepwalking, schizophrenia, to give some examples, which can adjust a man's impression of the truth shared by the majority of whatever is left of the world. Decisions made and activities performed affected by those mind-adjusting conditions won't not have an indistinguishable premise from decisions and activities made utilizing conventional thinking. 

There is lots of evidence