Kantianism and Mere Means

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

Abstract

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.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

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 R. Nyholm - 2012 - Dissertation, University of Michigan
The value of humanity in Kant's moral theory.Richard Dean - 2006 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Kant's Conception of Virtue.Lara Denis - 2006 - In Paul Guyer (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
99 (#171,909)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

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

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references