What is Kant trying to say?

In this blog post, I will attempt to clarify what Kant is trying to say in a part of the reading section assigned. Particularly, I want to focus on hypothetical and categorical imperatives. Kant defines imperative in this way; “The representation of an objective principle in so far as it is necessitating for a will is called a command (of reason), and the formula of the command is called imperative” (Kant, 27). What I believe he is trying to say here and in the paragraphs following it, have something to do with connecting the objective code of morality/reason with the subjective nature of human will and consciousness. For example, the laws of gravity operate in such a way that I cannot disobey them if I will myself to. I will fall to the ground no matter how much concentration I put towards levitating off the ground. Laws of reason operate in a different manner in that I can subjectively choose to obey or not obey them based upon my will. Imperative is basically a term defines the connection between the will I possess and the objective law I can choose to follow or not follow. Kant separates imperatives into two different categories; Hypothetical and Categorical. Hypothetical imperatives can be viewed similarly to instrumental goods or evils. Instrumental goods are things that lead to pleasure, but are not necessarily pleasurable in and of themselves. In a similar fashion, a hypothetical imperative is a command (as he puts it) for some action that is done to indirectly attain some higher object or purpose. Categorical imperatives on the other hand are commands for actions that are necessary on their own accord, or in in and of themselves. This is what I could dig up from this particular part of his reading.