ABSTRACT
This chapter explains why objections are mistaken, since states, and only states, are the bearers of intrinsic value. It suggests that the crucial value at issue is that which Korsgaard calls final value. It is the value that something has for its own sake that is the ground of all attributions of value. Notice two things about the claims made by Christine Korsgaard et al. First, it is precisely because of such examples that they insist on the distinction between intrinsic value and final value; for the final values they claim on behalf of the objects they cite supervene on extrinsic, relational features of the objects. And this brings straight to the second point, which is simply that the sort of claim made by Korsgaard et al. is very different from the sort of claim made earlier about pleasure.
