Explain Kant’s claim that, “To be beneficent where one can is a duty….” (p.14) Later in the Metaphysics of Morals Kant writes, “ …as to the meritorious duty toward others, the natural end that all human beings have is their own happiness. Now humanity would be able to subsist if no one contributed to the happiness of others yet did not intentionally remove anything from it; only this is only a negative and not a positive agreement with humanity as end in itself, if everyone does not aspire, as much as he can, to further the ends of others. For regarding the subject which is an end in itself: if that representation is to have its total effect on me, then its ends must as far as possible also be my ends.” (p.48)
Does Kant’s argument here remain consistent with the concept of non-consequential justifications?
How can this duty be consistently defended non-consequentially?