Cutamora, Vic Benjamin S.

Reflection on Kant and Respect for Persons

The first line in the chapter piqued my interest - Are there any who would not
admire man? It led me to realize that the answer to this question is greatly subjective.
On Kants Core Ideas, man is said to be irreplaceable no matter how a life may be born
shortly after a life has ended. Man can never be merely a means to an end. A mans life
is always and can always change depending on how situations provide the proper
allocation of ones judgement. That is why we all live a different life. We adjust and
comply with how much or how little is given to us and we survive from there. On the
other hand, the extent of the life and purpose of animals and things is so little that they
are usually considered to be exactly means to an end and as how humans use them.
Humans are already valuable but things can have value depending on how man can
give value to them. And I agree with Kant when he said that humans are the ones who
do the valuing.

On a scientific note, we are the highest form of animal. But Kant considered man
to be free agents capable of making their own decision and those rational capacities are
not hindered. Since we have value to begin with, our morality requires us to treat one
another as an end and never as a means. You do not use one man for your own
good and purposes not until he is aware and can decide for him whether or not to help
or comply with your request. To make it simple, consent should be present. And this
helps us to see that the Kantian sense of ends in themselves is part of ordinary moral
concern since to only treat persons as ends of our own is to act towards them in such a
way that there are no human relationships as such but only instrumentalities of
engagement.

On Kants Retribution and Utility in the Theory of Punishment, there are different
approaches that bring up several arguments on criminal punishment. Respect for
persons greatly reflect on utilitarianism - that we should only do what will increase the
happiness in the world. If punishment is given to a offender, the offender will not be
happy thus violating the essence of utilitarianism. However, punishment can only be
justified for as long as it does enough good to outweigh the bad. I strongly agree on the
benefits of utilitarianism. Punishments can give comfort, assurance, security and new
beginnings to victims. It can also prevent crimes by diminishing the number of criminals
and future criminals by making it known that an equivalent action is given from a
violation. However, the extent of punishment should also showcase the respect for the
criminal as to justify Kants beliefs. Hereby enters, Kants Retributivism.

And as Ive mentioned, the question Are there any who would not admire man?
is subjective and relative. It all boils down to the belief that respect begets respects.
Shall one honour another who has bypassed him? Shall one forgive without trying to be
even? I believe that we should weigh all possibilities and circumstances before trying to
act and to revisit, re-examine our values as to decide whether doing one thing is proper
and can be accepted if done unto us.