stankovic, sasa thesis.pdf - Atrium - University of Guelph

(Korsgaard 190). It is however the sense in which Wood takes humanity to be the value that
makes his interpretation of Kant’s practical philosophy problematic. Wood writes that for Kant
“rational nature is described as an end – an end in itself. Kant calls it a self-sufficient,’
‘independent,’ or ‘selfstanding’ (selbstständig) end, in contrast to an ‘end to be produced.’ It is
an end in the sense of something for the sake of which we act” (Wood 85). In this sense, Wood
claims, the value of humanity does not succeed action. Instead, it precedes action. “In the claim
that rational nature is an end in itself, rational nature is not being thought of a state of affairs to
be produced by an action. Instead, an ‘end in itself’ is something already existing whose value
grounds even our pursuit of the ends produced by our actions” (Wood 85). For this reason, Wood
argues that Kant’s practical philosophy does not begin with action. Instead, it begins with the
value of humanity that determines action. “This value is to motivate obedience to a categorical
imperative – a principle that rationality constrains us without presupposing any end to be
produced” (Wood 86). What is the problem with this interpretation of Kant’s practical
philosophy?
What Wood says about Kant’s practical philosophy is something that I think anyone who
has given the slightest thought to the nature of practice understands immediately. We do not just
act. Instead, we consider the value of others and ourselves as the moral standard against which
we act. This is of course not to say that every time we act we have to again and again think about
this value. Over time, we simply become the kinds of beings who act in the name of these values.
All this is well. However, I doubt that it has much to do with Kant’s practical philosophy. In fact
if it did, Kant’s practical philosophy would be open to a very serious objection. Wood himself
recognizes this objection. “Kant’s arguments for the bold thesis that humanity is an end in itself
are terse and obscure…We may have to face the fact that the mere claim that human beings have
85