What Should We Treat as an End in Itself
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8111024 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Richard Dean (0000-0002-0251-924X, Department of Philosophy University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 77 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 268-288 |
| Publication date | 1996-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Pacific philosophical quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0279-0750 • E-ISSN: 1468-0114 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1468-0114.1996.tb00171.x |
| OpenAlex | W2488613236 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
One formulation of the Categorical Imperative tells us to treat humanity as an end in itself. It has become common to think that ‘humanity’ ( die Menschheit ) here refers to some minimal power of rationality that is necessarily possessed by any rational agent, but I argue that this common reading is misguided. Instead, ‘humanity’ refers to a good will, the will of a being who is committed to moral principles. This good will reading of ‘humanity’ is not only suggested by passages in which Kant specifically discusses humanity, but also is more consistent with the main ideas of Kant's ethics
Epistemology · Kantian Philosophy and Modern Interpretations · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Psychoanalysis and Social Critique · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,22 |
| Citation span | 1999 - 2019 (21) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |