ABSTRACT
Margaret Jane Radin has developed the clearest and most influential account of commodification, noting that there are two senses of 'commodification'. In outlining the commodificatory attitude Radin noted that it involved objectifying that which it regards as a commodity, holding it to have the status of 'a thing in the Kantian sense of something that is manipulable at the will of persons'. The most well-known argument against the commodification of human body parts that can be found in Kant's work occurs immediately after his claim that a person is not entitled to sell his limbs for money. Kant's second argument against the commodification of human body parts fares no better than the Argument from Worth. One does not, however, need to accept the Kantian views outlined above to oppose the commodification of human kidneys. Instead, one might argue that if human body parts were commodified they would lose their status as things that are 'priceless', or 'beyond price'.
