Citation:
Huiyong ZHANG. On Kantian Deontological Theories in Animal Ethics[J]. Academic Monthly, 2020, 52(8): 56-66, 82.
On Kantian Deontological Theories in Animal Ethics
-
Abstract
Kant’s view on animals holds that human beings have no direct duties to animals, because they have no rational natures and cannot be persons, but human beings have duties regarding them, because these duties are necessary for human beings to cultivate their virtues. This view is demonstrated by many commenters as logocentrism, anthropocentrism and speciesism. In order to response these objections, Wood and Korsgaard attempt to construct Kantian direct duties to animals by amending Kant’s concepts such as reason, person and end in itself, while O’Neill, Denis, Altman and Kain try to defend Kant’s indirect duties regarding animals through emphasizing Kant’s concepts such as Humanity, moral feeling and moral anthropology. This article will point out that these commenters share a questionable premise, that is, it is incompatible between direct and indirect duties, and argues that Kant’s concept of amphiboly can help us to connect these two kinds of duties, which is also helpful for us to construct modern animal ethics.
-
-
References
-
Access
-
-
[1]
Shaobin BIAN
. Dignity and Necessity: Wood on Kant’s Ethical Thoughts. Academic Monthly,
2021, 53(6): 31-44.
-
[2]
ZHANG Huiyong
. . Academic Monthly,
2018, 50(6): 22-31.
-
[3]
GAO Like
. Mirror of Society and Transcendental Reason: Comparison of Moral Philosophies between Smith and Kant. Academic Monthly,
2023, 55(5): 26-35.
-
[4]
Shaobin BIAN
. Leave the State of Nature: Kant and Justification on the Idea of Public Right. Academic Monthly,
2019, 51(6): 13-31.
-
[5]
Xuguang LIU
. Free Play - Free Pleasure. Academic Monthly,
2020, 52(6): 122-134.
-
[6]
Ning SUN
. The Various Implications and Efficacies of Intuition. Academic Monthly,
2022, 54(2): 27-35.
-
[7]
Qingjie WANG
. Is Heidegger’s Fundamental Ontology A Philosophical Anthropology?. Academic Monthly,
2019, 51(8): 5-12.
-
[8]
Qun GONG
. The Status of Nature Law in Kant’s Ethics. Academic Monthly,
2021, 53(8): 23-30.
-
[9]
Sha FENG
, Zhipei ZHANG
. Plunder and Return: Colonial-era Artifacts as Contested Cultural Heritage and Their Ethical Predicament. Academic Monthly,
2021, 53(11): 186-199.
-
[10]
Linhe HAN
. Does Kant Make the Distinction of Reason and Cause. Academic Monthly,
2021, 53(12): 13-18.
-
[11]
Linhe HAN
. On the Problem of Overdetermination in Kant’s Philosophy. Academic Monthly,
2020, 52(8): 37-45, 55.
-
[12]
. . Academic Monthly,
2017, 49(08): 141-151.
-
[13]
NAN Xing
. Kantian Freedom: Anthropological not Metaphysical. Academic Monthly,
2023, 55(8): 27-40.
-
[14]
. . Academic Monthly,
2017, 49(05): 19-30.
-
[15]
. Law and Freedom: Normative Interpretation on Kant’s Formulas of Categorical Imperatives. Academic Monthly,
2018, 50(03): 42-56.
-
[16]
NIE Minli
. Kant and Foucault： The Misread “Enlightenment” and Its Postmodern Intellectual Effects. Academic Monthly,
2023, 55(9): 14-21.
-
[17]
. . Academic Monthly,
2016, 48(04): 20-28.
-
[18]
SUN Chunchen
. . Academic Monthly,
2023, 55(6): 212-216.
-
[19]
GAO Song
. From Animal to AI—— A Phenomenological Investigation into Various Forms of Meaning-understanding. Academic Monthly,
2023, 55(11): 15-27.
-
[20]
,
. . Academic Monthly,
2017, 49(12): 78-89.
-
-
沪公网安备 31010102003103号
DownLoad: