# Treating Persons as Means

> 【EN】Sometimes it is morally wrong to treat persons as means. When a person says that someone is treating him merely as a means, for example, he often implies that she is failing to abide by a moral norm. Ethically disapproving judgments that a person is “just using” or sometimes simply “using” another are common in everyday discourse (e.g., Goldman & Schmidt 2018). Authors appeal to the idea that research on human subjects (Levine 2007: 140; Van der Graaf and Van Delden 2012), management of employees (Haywood 1918: 217), and criminal punishment (Duff 1986: 178–179) is wrong if it involves treating persons merely as means. The notion that treating people in that way is morally problematic has appeared in debate regarding terrorism (Card 2010: 131), pornography (Baird & Rosenbaum 1998: 103, 106), and surrogate motherhood (Macklin 1994: 64). … 【中】词条追溯这一观念的康德根源，并逐层分析利用他人的诸种形态：阻止对方选择去追求自己的目的、使对方陷入实践上的不合理、可能的同意与实际的同意。关键问题是：何种条件使把人当作手段上升为道德错误，它与强制、剥削、操纵和尊重如何区分，以及日常用法是否必然援引道德规范。

- ID: m13277
- Category: culture
- Domain: 伦理学

## Definition

有时把人当作手段在道德上是错的。当一个人说别人仅仅把他当作手段时，往往是在指责对方违反了某种道德规范。日常话语中只是在利用人的谴责十分常见，也被用于批评人体实验、员工管理与刑罚中的某些做法。 脚手架作用：- 关系审视：检查是否绕开对方自主判断，把其理性能力仅当工具使用。 - 边界判定：用同意、合理预期与互惠，判断管理或实验做法是否越界。

## How it works

康德式思路认为，理性存在者具有设定目的的资格，他人的行动必须能被对方理性地接受。若行动者绕开或压制对方的自主选择，把对方的理性能力仅仅当作实现自己目的的工具，就侵犯了这一点；而同意、合理预期与互惠可以改变这种关系的性质。

## Practice

1) 明确谁把谁当作实现何种目的的手段；2) 检查是否阻碍了对方自主选择其目的；3) 考察对方是否可能或实际给予了同意；4) 判断这种利用属于可接受的日常合作，还是越过了道德边界。

## Use

- 关系审视：检查是否绕开对方自主判断，把其理性能力仅当工具使用。 - 边界判定：用同意、合理预期与互惠，判断管理或实验做法是否越界。

[Read the web page](https://thinkingmodels.site/en/entries/detail/m13277)