Environmental Ethics 32 (3):267-284 (2010)

Few think that Kant’s moral theory can provide a defensible view in the area of environmental ethics because of Kant’s well-known insistence that all nonhumans are mere means. An examination of the relevant arguments, however, shows that they do not entitle Kant to his position. Moreover, Kant’s own Formula of Universal Law generates at least one important and basic duty which is owed both to human beings and to nonhuman animals. The resulting Kantian theory not only is sounder and more intuitive than the original, but also boasts some notable theoretical advantages over some of the most prominent views in environmental ethics
Keywords Applied Philosophy  General Interest
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0163-4275
DOI 10.5840/enviroethics201032331
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,308
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Respect for Everything.David Schmidtz - 2011 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 14 (2):127 - 138.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Kant's Treatment of Animals.Holly L. Wilson - 2011 - In Paul Pojman (ed.), Food Ethics. Wadsworth.
Kantian Value Realism.Alison Hills - 2008 - Ratio 21 (2):182–200.
Kantian Consequentialism.David Cummiskey - 1990 - Ethics 100 (3):586-615.
Human Rights.Clark Butler - 2002 - Philo 5 (1):5-22.
On the Universal Law and Humanity Formulas.Sven Nyholm - 2012 - Dissertation, University of Michigan
Kant's Conception of Virtue.Lara Denis - 2006 - In Paul Guyer (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.


Added to PP index

Total views
86 ( #106,378 of 2,325,999 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #293,124 of 2,325,999 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes