Unformatted text preview: 4. What serves the will as a subjective ground of its self-determination is an end, and what contains the ground of the possibility of actions whose effect is an end is called a means. Act only in ways that treat others as ends-in-themselves, and never merely as means. Discussion: 1. They are similar, because the first rule assumes that a maxim should be held universally while the second states that the rational being is the basis of all maxims of action and must be treated never as a mere means but as the supreme limiting condition in the use of all means, i.e., as an end at the same time. 2. No, because even though the motive for doing an act may not be honorable others still benefit from the act. 3. Yes, it could be argued that if people participate in an activity such as basketball with out an honorable motive than they are doing something immoral....
View Full Document
- Spring '07
- Kant, Hypothetical imperative