<P> Kant's second formulation of the Categorical Imperative is to treat humanity as an end in itself: </P> <P> Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means . </P> <P> Kant argued that rational beings can never be treated merely as means to ends; they must always also be treated as ends themselves, requiring that their own reasoned motives must be equally respected . This derives from Kant's claim that reason motivates morality: it demands that we respect reason as a motive in all beings, including other people . A rational being cannot rationally consent to being used merely as a means to an end, so they must always be treated as an end . Kant justified this by arguing that moral obligation is a rational necessity: that which is rationally willed is morally right . Because all rational agents rationally will themselves to be an end and never merely a means, it is morally obligatory that they are treated as such . This does not mean that we can never treat a human as a means to an end, but that when we do, we also treat him as an end in himself . </P> <P> Kant's Formula of Autonomy expresses the idea that an agent is obliged to follow the Categorical Imperative because of their rational will, rather than any outside influence . Kant believed that any moral law motivated by the desire to fulfill some other interest would deny the Categorical Imperative, leading him to argue that the moral law must only arise from a rational will . This principle requires people to recognize the right of others to act autonomously and means that, as moral laws must be universalisable, what is required of one person is required of all . </P>

Why should we always treat all rational beings as ends and never merely as means
find me the text answering this question