Chapter 10 Kant and Respect for Persons 10 1 KANTS core ideas Immanuel Kant thought human beings occupy a special place in creation humans have considered themselves to be essentially different from all other creatures and not just different but better humans have considered themselves to be quite fabulous KANT CERTAINLY DID HIS VIEW human beings have an intrinsic worth or dignity that makes them valuable above all price OTHER ANIMALS KANT THOUGHT have value only insofar as they serve human purposes Believed we have no direct duties to animals animals are there merely as means to an end That END is MAN we can use animals anyway we please don t even have direct duty to restrain from torturing them He did condemn the abuse of animals not because of the animals sake but because men would become hard in his dealings with men Kant says human beings are valuable above all price meant that people are irreplaceable Ex If a child dies in a family they can NOT be replaced by having another child BUT MERE THINGS ARE REPLACEABLE EX If your printer break you can replace with another one KANT BELIEVES People HAVE A DIGNITY THAT MERE THINGS LACK Two facts about people support that judgement 1 People have desires things that satisfy those desires can have value for people mere things have value only insofar as they promote human ends Ex If you want to become a poker player a book about poker becomes valuable but jf you don t need the book then they are worthless ANIMALS are too primitive to have self conscious desires and goals so they ARE mere things Kant did NOT believe that mill became valuable because cats wanted to drink it NOW we are more impressed with the mental life of animals than Kant was we believe animals DO have desires and goals we have ground for saying that animals are not mere things However KANTS SECOND rule would NOT apply to animals 2 People Kant said have an intrinsic worth I e dignity because they are RATIONAL AGENTS can make their own decisions set their own goals guide their conduct by reason THE ONLY WAY THAT MORAL GOODNESS CAN EXIST IS FOR RATIONAL CREATURES TO act from a good will that is TO APPREHEND WHAT YHEY SHOULD DO AND ACT FROM A SENSE OF DUTY Human beings are the ONLY rational agents that exist on earth non human animals lack free will and they do NOT guide their conduct by reason rational capacities are TOO limited If people DISAPPEARED SO WOULD THE MORAL DIMENSION OF THE WORLD SECOND FACT ABOUT PEOPLE IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FOR KANT thus Kant BELIEVED human beings are NOT merely one valuable thing amount others Humans are the ones who do the valuing and it is their conscientious actions that have moral worth HUMAN BEINGS TOWer ABOVE THE Realm OF THINGS THESE THOUGHTS are central to KANTS MORAL SYSTEM he believed THAt all of our duties can be derived from one ultimate principle which he called the categorical imperative act so thAt you treat humanity whether in your own person or in that of another always as an end and never as a means only Because people are SO valuable morality requires us to treat them always as an end and never as a means only To treat people as an end on most superficial level treating them well MUST PROMOTE Welfare Respect their rights avoid harming them endeavor so far as we can to further the end of others KANT IDEA ALSO HAS A DEEPER IMPLICATION To treat people as ends requires treating them with respect We may NOT manipulate people or USE people to achieve OUR goals no matter how GOOD those goals may be Ex Suppose you need money and you want a loan but you know you cannot repay it But you tell your friend you will in order to get the money You may need the money for a good purpose so good in fact that you might convince yourself that the lie would be justified nevertheless you should NOT lie to your friend if you did you would be manipulating them and using them merely as means If you treat her as an end Tell her the truth then she can make up her mind make a free choice If she then decides to give you the money for your stated purpose she will be choosing to MAKE THAT PURPOSE HER OWN Thus you would not be using her as a mere means to achieving your goal for it will be HER goal TOO Thus for KANT TREATING PEOPLE AS ENDS is to treat them as being who can contain in themselves the end of the very same action When you tell your friend the truth And she gives you money you are using her as a means to getting the money However Kant does not OBJECT to treating someone as a means he objects to treating some only as a means Ex You can call a plumber to unclog your toilet if you NEED them Kant has no problem with this because plumber understands the situation You are NOT deceiving or manipulating him He may freely choose to unclog the drain in EXCHANGE for payment In that case you treat the plumber as means but with DIGNITY AS WELL As an end in himself Treating people as ends and respecting their rational capacities has other implications we should not force adults to do things against their will we should let them make their own decisions wary of laws that aim to protect people from themselves Respecting PEOPLE requires respecting OURSELVES I should take good care of myself I should develop my talents I should do more than just slide by 10 2 Retribution and Utility in the Theory of Punishment Jeremy Bentham says that all punishment is mischief all punishment in itself is evil Point punishment by it s nature always involves inflicting some harm on the person punished As a society we punish people by making them pay fines or go to prison or even sometimes by killing them The traditional answer is that punishment is justified as a way of paying back the offender for his wicked deed Those that committed a crime deserve to be treated badly It is a matter of justice if you harm other people justice requires that you may be harmed too According to the doctrine of Retributivism this is the main justification of punishment Bentham viewed Retributivism as a wholly unsatisfactory idea because it advocates the infliction of suffering without any compensating gain in happiness Retributivism would have us INCREASE amount of misery in the world Kant was a Retributivist In Critique of Practical Reason When someone who delights in annoying and vexing peace loving folk receives at last a right good beating it is certainly an ill but everyone approves of it and considers it as good in itself certainly an ill but everyone approves of it and considers it as