Priceless: A Kiss and the Ends of Life
What the Humanities Teach us about the Difference Between the Means and Ends of Life
Our culture lacks a robust, critical discussion of values and their role in our individual, social, and political lives. Value-based beliefs are often taken for granted, fading into the background of our cognitive processes, out of sight from our critical and conscious thought. Yet, whether we recognize them or not, these values animate our thinking, contextualize our observations, and inform our decisions.
An insidious effect of failing to consciously and critically acknowledge the power value-based beliefs exert in our lives is that we fall into the habit of prioritizing the means of life—practical considerations—over the ends, the ultimate goods of life that give those practical considerations their purpose. In his 1948 lecture, “Individual and Social Ethics,” British philosopher Bertrand Russell argued that understanding the distinction between means and ends was necessary to ensure a fulfilling and joyful existence. He wrote,
“If human life is not to become dusty and uninteresting, it is important to realize that there are things that have a value which is quite independent of utility. What is useful is useful because it is a means to something else, and the something else, if it is not in turn merely a means, must be valued for its own sake, for otherwise the usefulness is illusory.”
Those who argue it is self-evidently true that our educational and career goals should be centered on maximizing monetary gain exemplify the error of narrowly concentrating on the means of life at the expense of a serious awareness of the ends of life. Many criticisms of the humanities are rooted in precisely this erroneous assertion. Here the humanities prove to be invaluable, once more and rather ironically, teaching us to contemplate this existentially vital distinction. The humanities also facilitate ongoing awareness of the primacy of ends over means, and affirm the supreme value of life and humanity over objects and functionality.
A brief note of appreciation to all of our subscribers. Please share our work with others. And thank you to our paid subscribers who help sustain our work. For those not yet subscribed, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber, today.
Pricelessness and Two Species of Value
Anyone who has ever been broke understands the value of a dollar. Working people know that we need money to ensure our basic needs for housing, health, and sustenance are met. Yet, as important as pursuit of financial security is, we must also be mindful of the strangely elusive truth that the most valuable aspects of human existence defy economic quantification or valuation. They are, in a word, priceless.
To speak of the value of a loved one, human freedom, or experiencing a glorious sunrise is to speak of a different species of value compared to the value of something like a phone, car, or house. These latter objects of value are not priceless. As much as we might value them, they do indeed have a price. If someone came along offering an advantageous trade or the right amount of money for these things, we would consider the transaction. And the value of these objects increases or diminishes in relation to their service to our greater goals, like communicating or spending time with a loved one, facilitating the exercise of our freedom, or enabling us to travel to the perfect place to experience that awe-inspiring sunrise.
Philosophers and spiritual thinkers have offered us a helpful conceptual distinction between these two kinds of values. In his sermon, “Why Jesus Called a Man a Fool,” Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., describes the means-ends distinction in spiritual terms.
“You see, each of us lives in two realms, the within and the without. Now the within of our lives is that realm of spiritual ends expressed in art, literature, religion, and morality. The without of our lives is that complex of devices, of mechanisms and instrumentalities by means of which we live. The house we live in—that’s a part of the means by which we live. The car we drive, the clothes we wear, the money that we are able to accumulate—in short the physical stuff that’s necessary for us to exist.”
The things we value as useful in achieving something else are prized as “means,” as in they are means to an end. Another way to express this idea is to say that some things possess extrinsic value. Such objects have a value that is contingent on their relation to something else. Something with extrinsic value has a value that is not within or internal to itself, but based on its use or service to some greater, more important aim or purpose.
Consider the different ways we might value a coffee mug. Most of us value a given coffee mug because we enjoy coffee and the mug facilitates this enjoyment. We might even value a particular mug over another. (This coffee lover sides with those who believe coffee tastes much better in a ceramic mug than one made of stainless steal.) If the mug were to break in such a way that it could no longer facilitate this enjoyment, we would discard it. On the way to the trashcan we might decide to repurpose the mug to hold some coins or pens. But if the mug lost this newly determined usefulness, it would continue on its journey to the landfill. This would mean that we valued the mug only as a means to an end. It possessed purely extrinsic or instrumental value.
Still, we can imagine another scenario in which the mug’s value transcends its conventional purpose. We might value a mug that is rather bad at doing what it is ostensibly purposed to do. It’s too small, does a terrible job of keeping our coffee warm, and, to top it off, makes it easy to spill our precious caffeinated beverage. Why then would we still value it? Perhaps its primary purpose is something other than the stated one. We might imagine valuing the mug because a dear friend gave it to us. And each time we drink from it we experience warm feelings of connection to this human being we so love. (Feelings that are, coincidentally, warmer than the room-temperature coffee.)
The beings, experiences, or things that we value for their own sake are ends, as in, ends unto themselves. Something is an “end unto itself” when its value is independent of its function or usefulness. When something is an end, its value resides within itself and is not contingent on external factors or instrumental functionality. Something we value in this way possesses intrinsic or inherent value. This is no trivial concept when considered under the light of ordinary thinking. We are often given the impression that the most valuable is that which is most useful. Yet here we have a concept implying that something that may be entirely use-less is among the most valuable or important parts of life.
When we say that human beings possess dignity, for example, we are saying they are ends unto themselves and are, therefore, intrinsically valuable. Human rights are based on the notion that the worth of our lives is independent of our usefulness to others. To treat a person as if they were a mere useful object is a violation of their intrinsic value or dignity, not a violation of scientifically determined laws of nature. This value, in turn, is based on some combination of sentience—the capacity to experience joy or suffering—and self-awareness, and the judgment that such qualities are important. Enlightenment era German philosopher Immanuel Kant formulated the moral principle resulting from this understanding in Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals (1785).
“So act as to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end withal, never as a means only.”
For Kant, we are as obligated duty-bound to respect ourselves as we are others since all persons are ends-unto themselves and not mere objects. He wrote,
“…a man is not a thing, that is to say, something which can be used merely as means, but must in all his actions be always considered as an end in himself.”
The main point here is that the claim a person has dignity means that their value is not based on their usefulness to others, be it the advancement of a nation, science, or even humanity itself. To possess dignity is to possess a value independent of other objects and beings.
More broadly, the ends in life are the experiences and beings we treasure as intrinsically valuable or important. These ends are the motivations for, and give value to, secondary undertakings such as the pursuit of money to secure a home, food, and safety. But we too often lose sight of the fact that much of what is counted as “important” or “practical” gains its (extrinsic) value in the service to ends, and therefore depend upon the prioritization of ends for their value.
The primacy of ends and absurdity of strictly means-oriented living is clear when we consider a kiss between two lovers.
They walk along a dark and empty walkway. They’ve just finished a delightful meal with friends at a favorite restaurant. Music plays from the outside speakers of the quant downtown streets. The stars shine overhead, and the wind gently blows through the purple jacarandas lining the walkway. The two walk arm in arm, laughing over bad jokes and innocently impolite observations about their dinner company. They pause to peer into a closed shop door for some late hour window-shopping. As they turn to walk away, one of the two is spontaneously struck with affectionate desire. She gently presses her lover against the dimly lit wall and kisses him for the better part of the melodious song playing in harmony with the wind orchestrated trees.
As the song concludes, she opens her eyes with a smile. In response, he asks, “What was the point of that?”
I’ve painted this scenario in class and asked students how they might respond to such an inquiry. Once, a female student remarked that a smack across the face would be the right response. I don’t condone violence, but the point is clear enough: what a truly dumb question!
Presuming that the two lovers were themselves in agreement that romantic love is one of the great ends of life, asking what point there is to experiencing intimacy with your beloved is akin to asking why something that is of the utmost importance is important. The point of the kiss is nothing more than to experience the kiss and the human intimacy it entails. Such coming together of human beings is, for most of us, understood as a self-justifying good. A kiss of this kind is not merely an instrument of some other purpose; it is the fulfillment of the value of love or human connection. To insist that it must have some larger aim is to miss the point that the best parts of life are to be appreciated for their own sake.
What exactly ought to count as the ends of life remains an open question worthy of reflection and dialogue. Interpersonal love of one kind or another is a clear forerunner. Many of us also derive joy from the intrinsic goodness of a swimming in the ocean, walking through the woods, chatting with a best friend, eating a good meal, an exhilarating run, playing games, being creative, and so on. While some of these experiences may well yield some kind of returns—such as a product derived from our creativity, growing bond with our best friend, a fuller belly after our meal, stress reduction from the walk, and a healthier heart after the run or swim—these returns are bonuses.
Integrity and the Ends of Life
To grasp this distinction is to gain fundamental insight about the nature of human existence. The humanities teach us that living a life of integrity requires an uncommon awareness of the ends or goals that give meaning to practical decision making. As the French essayist Montaigne put it in his essay, “Of the inconsistency of our actions” (1572-1574),
“The archer must first know what he is aiming at, and then set his hand, his bow, his string, his arrow, and his movements for that goal. Our plans go astray because they have no direction and no aim. No wind works for the man who has no port of destination.”
The same point was made about 400-years later by the renowned humanist psychologist, Abraham Maslow. In Religions, Values, and Peak-Experiences (1964), he wrote,
“The better we know which ends we want, the easier it is for us to create truly efficient means to those ends. If we are not clear about those ends, or deny that there are any, then we are doomed to confusion of instruments. We can’t speak about efficiency unless we know efficiency for what. (I want to quote again that veritable symbol of our times, the test pilot who radioed back, ‘I’m lost, but I’m making record time.’).”
The ends or ultimate purposes we adopt literally give meaning to our existence and all of the activities that we take up. A person who busies themselves exclusively with so-called “practical” matters—the means of life—is akin to an aimless vacationer. Imagine such a man who has gone to great lengths to prepare for his vacation.
He has asked for and received time off from his job, but not before saving a substantial amount of money. He has also made arrangements to ensure his pets will be looked after while he is away. He has packed his bags with all of the essentials. He is right this minute having his car serviced to ensure it is in tip-top shape for travel. This practical man knows how to prepare. He is ready!
The day the trip is meant to begin it suddenly dawns on him that he has made one small mistake. He has not decided where he is going. And in that moment it becomes very clear that much of his preparation was quite literally pointless since we cannot be prepared for something until we’ve determined what it is we intend to prepare for.
Like the well-prepared but aimless traveler, many of us approach education, parenting, relationships, and, broadly speaking, life in a similar manner. We allow ourselves to become so concentrated on the means of life—making money, cleaning our home, paying bills, running errands, superficially entertaining ourselves so that we can recuperate from our busy lives, etc.—that we lose sight on the ends that give life its fullest meaning.
Subscribe
Subscribers will receive periodic posts pertaining to the broad domain of humanistic inquiry, from the insights of great thinkers throughout human history, the meaning and importance of critical thinking and ethics, the underappreciated poetry in everyday existence, to contemporary cultural analysis and the ongoing struggle to combat human oppression and violence. You will also have the opportunity to engage the author and our online community in dialogue about each post.
Why get a paid subscription?
Paid subscriptions directly support Dr. Jeffrey Nall’s efforts to produce and share publicly accessible independent scholarship and analysis. Supporting donations can also be made through PayPal. For more about my work go to JeffreyNall.com and find me on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.
We now live in a society that is bathed in utilitarian ideas, where the end justifies the means, although most people are unaware of it, because they are in survival mode. So many of the personal relations today are superficial and transactional with the hopes of monetization. Yes, money has become not only the measure of financial success, but also a (poor) social measure of stability.
This is why society and the media fawn over the wealthy, even if their ideas are nonsensical and they speak as ignoramuses on subjects way beyond their comprehension and understanding. The thinking goes, "If they are rich, they must be smart." So much evidence contradicts that statement.
Most people, besides academics and retired persons (I am one), do not have the luxuary or the inclination to think independently. Yet, thinking is not for the weak; it takes practice, for example, and reading leads the way, and in particular on how to read critically and closely. I highly recommend everyone who has the inclination to take a liberal arts education. Or do it at home. Read all the classics, all the great literature.
If you do, it will be a work and time well-spent: money will become significantly less important. What you will find out is that it is all about relationships--human, animal and our environment.