Kant is very controversial for his views on animal ethics. He states that since animals aren’t rational so they don’t deserve direct moral consideration, and committing a cruel act to an animal is only bad in so far as it is bad for yourself. How does having a capacity for rationality make you worthy of moral consideration. More importantly why does Kant make the argument that rationality is the basis of moral consideration. I simply don’t get it.
In: 8
This is probably not the best place to be asking this question. Maybe try in r/Philosophy or r/AskPhilosophy. I don’t think most people here are well versed with Kant’s work or philosophy in general.
Latest Answers