But if you say value is subjective and given, you can not say it's intrinsic.
And if you say people are valued because they are "causes" of happiness/pleasure, they are also "means" whether the cause is direct or indirect.
But if you say value is subjective and given, you can not say it's intrinsic.
And if you say people are valued because they are "causes" of happiness/pleasure, they are also "means" whether the cause is direct or indirect.
Now if treating people as ends is recognizing the objective value that's inherent to the other person, I can understand why you'd call that intrinsic.
Now if treating people as ends is recognizing the objective value that's inherent to the other person, I can understand why you'd call that intrinsic.
As for empathy, can you help me understand what you're getting at? Empathy is extrinsic to the individual. But you're calling value intrinsic.
As for empathy, can you help me understand what you're getting at? Empathy is extrinsic to the individual. But you're calling value intrinsic.
I can describe color or figure on a molecular level. I can't do the same for value. Why should I believe humans have intrinsic value?
I can describe color or figure on a molecular level. I can't do the same for value. Why should I believe humans have intrinsic value?
You can treat people as ends, but to say that people are objectively/intrinsically ends requires some authority or reason. If I said humans are not ends but means, how would you respond to that?
You can treat people as ends, but to say that people are objectively/intrinsically ends requires some authority or reason. If I said humans are not ends but means, how would you respond to that?