David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History of Philosophy Quarterly 17 (4):405-23 (2000)
In Kant’s moral theory, we do not have duties to animals, though we have duties with regard to them. I reconstruct Kant’s arguments for several types of duties with regard to animals and show that Kant’s theory imposes far more robust requirements on our treatment of animals than one would expect. Kant’s duties regarding animals are perfect and imperfect; they are primarily but not exclusively duties to oneself; and they condemn not merely cruelty to animals for its own sake, but also, such things as killing them for food when our health does not require it and ingratitude to service animals. Central to understanding these duties is appreciating Kant’s concern for our morally useful emotions, for it is primarily because of the effect that cruelty to animals has on our sympathetic emotions—which greatly help us treat other rational beings appropriately—that we have duties not to be cruel to animals. Yet cruelty and callousness toward animals are not problematic only because they may weaken some of our morally useful emotions. Cruelty and callousness toward animals are problematic also because they oppose our morally useful emotions; these emotions, as part of the perfection of our nature, should be honored, supported, and furthered, unless there are compelling reasons not to do so in particular cases
|Keywords||Kantian ethics animals duties to oneself indirect duties|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Lara Denis (2007). Kant's Formula of the End in Itself: Some Recent Debates. Philosophy Compass 2 (2):244–257.
Jens Timmermann (2005). When the Tail Wags the Dog: Animal Welfare and Indirect Duty in Kantian Ethics. Kantian Review 10 (1):128-149.
Similar books and articles
Lara Denis (2008). Animality and Agency: A Kantian Approach to Abortion. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (1):117-37.
Holly L. Wilson (2011). Kant's Treatment of Animals. In Paul Pojman (ed.), Food Ethics. Wadsworth
Robert Heeger & Frans W. A. Brom (2001). Intrinsic Value and Direct Duties: From Animal Ethics Towards Environmental Ethics? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):241-252.
Allen W. Wood & Onora O'Neill (1998). Kant on Duties Regarding Nonrational Nature. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 72 (1):189–210.
Tom Regan (1980). Animal Rights, Human Wrongs. Environmental Ethics 2 (2):99-120.
Lara Denis (1997). Kant's Ethics and Duties to Oneself. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):321–348.
Steve Cooke (2011). Duties to Companion Animals. Res Publica 17 (3):261-274.
Robert Bass (2006). Undermining Indirect Duty Theories. Between the Species (6):1.
Added to index2009-02-05
Total downloads92 ( #45,350 of 1,907,889 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #195,456 of 1,907,889 )
How can I increase my downloads?