Risk imposition wrongs the victim by treating her as a mere means to the agent's ends, a Kantian deontic fact that supervenes on the structure of the action, not on its causal consequences.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Kantian: "Kantian" refers to the ideas of Immanuel Kant, an 18th-century German philosopher who fundamentally changed how we think about knowledge and morality. Kant argued that our minds actively shape what we experience in the world (rather than passively receiving information) and that we have a universal moral duty to act according to principles we'd want everyone to follow. His influence is so widespread that "Kantian" is used today to describe any approach to ethics or thinking that emphasizes reason, universal principles, and treating people as ends in themselves rather than as means to an end.
Mere means(in ethics): Treating someone only as a tool to get what you want, rather than respecting them as a person with their own goals and dignity.
Risk imposition(in ethics): When someone exposes another person to danger or potential harm for their own benefit, without that person's agreement.
Structure of the action(in ethics): The basic design or framework of what someone does—who does it, what they're trying to achieve, and how they're treating others involved.

Based on where you are in your exploration