On Treating Each Other as Ends

In the middle of Section II, Kant states, "So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely is a means" (4:429). I want to both clarify what Kant says in these couple of pages (4:428-4:429) and offer a criticism of this law.

In these pages, Kant distinguishes between objects (specifically things) and people and between subjective ends and objective ends. The importance of Kant marking the difference between things in people is that we are rational beings, and our ability to reason is natures way of marking us as something not meant to be used as a means. Rational beings are subsequently, "an object of respect"; all rational beings must respect every other rational being by treating them as ends. Furthermore, for Kant, it is not enough to say that rational beings must be respect as subjective ends as that undermines the "absolute worth" of rational beings. To treat someone as a subjective end means merely that it has worth for you, but respecting a rational being as rational is more fundamental for Kant than just having subjective worth for you. Hence, Kant argues, we must treat rational beings as objective ends because rational beings' existence has absolute value; value that relies solely on its existence. Kant's point is that if we are to properly respect rational beings, we must respect them as objective ends (as ends in themselves) or else we undermine the absolute worth of rationality in beings. 

Thus Kant arrives at the conclusion that we must treat everybody, including ourselves, as an ends in themselves. Kant uses three examples to show how this could be a powerful and successful moral guide. While this is a very attractive, egalitarian, and noble law, Kant does not do a very good job of actually telling us what treating someone as an end in themselves would look like. All three of his examples merely show how treating someone as a means would violate his law, but they do not tell us what treating someone as an objective end would actually look like. Do I not ask people for anything? Do I love everybody as I love a family member? Is it even possible for me to treat someone as an end in this way? What is the proper way to respect rationality? Let everyone do what they want, so long as what they want seems to fit in with the other maxims we create? My point is that I cannot imagine what it would look like and Kant does not paint a very clear picture about what it should look like. Kant seems willing to say that the Kingdom of Ends is more an ideal than necessarily a completely real possibility, but he does not seem as keen to say the same for treating people as ends. Clearly Kant has a picture about how to treat someone as an end, but he never really shows us what that is.