Prompt 8: Summarize and explain the second formulation of the categorical imperative commanding us to treat people (ourselves included) as “ends in themselves” and never merely as means. Consider intrinsic versus instrumental value and how that value plays a role in moral theory.

Second Formulation:

Some people can be selfish enough to go do something unpredictable just to make themselves feel better by bragging on how they helped a person, so that they can prove a point and show how a good person they are when in reality they’re not. It’s good that they’re helping others, however aren’t doing the right reasons, therefore the categorical imperative shows that it’s meaningless and is what most people do wrong about. For an example, You-tubers have videos of helping the homeless giving them food or giving strangers I-phones and Samsung. Not all You-tubers fake their videos, however they’re some that does for views and in reality they don’t genuinely help people behind the cameras. If the person had intentions of helping a person, Kant would approve, but it wasn’t intentional, Kant wouldn’t approve of it. This would be always be consider as humanity as an end never as the means.

Intrinsic versus Instrumental value:

Instrumental value is when a person values a device such as a phone and use it until the battery drains out or the phone is taken away. When that happens people want a better phone with the best advancement technology which is quality over quantity. Intrinsic value means people are valuable in what what Kant described. Another one is to value on someone and what they mean to you. Unlike Kant who values humans, John Stuart Mill doesn’t value anything about it claim that, “pleasure and happiness are valuable in and of themselves.” Happiness and pleasure can be valuable of you’re feeling because it’s something everyone feels great about. It’s so great that people attend to share their happiness with others and would do anything to make a person laugh.

Moral Theory:

The theory suggests that Kant doesn’t approve of lying. I would disagree, because everyone has their own reason of why they had lied to others. This theory has a right and wrong effect of lying. People lie for a a good reason, for instance surprises, don’t want to hurt others, and to avoid conflict. The intrinsic and instrumental value has a role with this theory. It sometimes can go extreme by lying to people when we tell our parents that we got good grades, so they wouldn’t be disappointed or do something you’re supposed to because you had been told to do it, unfortunately didn’t do it. This example would be instrumental value of to treat your parents. Morally Kant would say that instrumental value is using others to get what you want and it’s always humanity as an end never as the means.

W/C: 479