Categorical Imperative

At age 13, Danielle Bregoli accidentally became a viral internet sensation. She sky-rocketed to pop-culture relevance when clips from her appearance on the daytime talk show Dr. Phil, in a segment entitled “I Want to Give Up My Car-Stealing, Knife-Wielding, Twerking 13-Year-Old Daughter Who Tried to Frame Me for a Crime,” were turned into viral videos and popularly recreated internet jokes. Often referred to by the most commonly quoted catchphrase, the “cash me ousside” girl no finds herself the subject of articles, paparazzi attention, and reportedly an upcoming reality TV show (Hautman, 2017). Although Bregoli appears to be please with these developments in her life, the trajectory her image has taken was one that was entirely out of her
Because Kant says that what is right is what is done by a good will, a good will which is ruled by duty, duty determined by the Categorical Imperative, which emphasizes in all of its forms logical a priori thinking, and maintaining the abilities of all other rational beings to be rational. More specifically, not using a person as means calls that people “act in such a way that you always treat humanity… never simply as a means, but always at the same time, as an ends” (Darwall, 1998, p. 164). Treating someone as a means involves acts of coercion and manipulation, taking away from them their ability to rationally evaluate right and wrong and keeping them from acting out in accordance with a good will. Kant’s theory evaluates the reasons that people are acting, and if those reasons are driven by the Categorical Imperative, as in if they are intentions are giving people the ability to be rational beings. In the case of Danielle Bregoli, she faces the exploitation Gerber outlines and limitations to her rationality that, for Kant, are very
Phil and the attention that came after it, Danielle Bregoli was not given the ability to opt in to the situation out of a range of choices, not fully informed and understanding of the possibilities, and no longer has the ability to negotiate herself out of this situation if she may ever desire. Her mother states in her interview with Dr. Phil that she is at the end of her rope and admits to having “just given up” (Dr. Phil, 2016). The narrative presented makes it seem like Danielle’s only options are to go on the show and hopefully find reform at a therapy ranch the show sends her to, as if her mother has no other option than to turn to Dr. Phil and Turn-About Ranch and she has no options but to follow or go to jail. Given the choice between going on a talk show and going to jail, she makes a clearly understandable choice however not one that she reasonably would have ever not taken. Danielle was not given the benefit of other possibilites at the time she agreed to go on the show, whether because this was the only form of help her mother could afford or because this was the last option her mother presented her with, she made the choice to be there because it was the better choice of two bad choices. She did not have Gerber’s full range of choices available to her, making the situation one she could not have rationally consented to either way. Similarly, she is seemingly uninformed about the extent of her participation in the show and