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.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,752

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
113 (#189,148)

6 months
11 (#337,502)

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