Difference Between Kantian Perspective And Animal Rights

The Kantian Perspective and Animal Rights Introduction According to the American Pet Products Association, Americans spend 60.28 billion dollars on their pets in 2015 alone. Domesticated animals have integrated their way into every part of the globe. Our pets have become a part of the family, but consistently animals moral rights are challenged. This essay will explore the Kantian perspective, its views on animal rights, and show that animals are deserving of rights under the Kantian perspective.
What is the Kantian Perspective? The Kantian perspective is a normative ethical theory that focuses on fairness and justice. One of the biggest components of this theory is the principle of universalizability. The principle of universalizability states that, “An act is morally acceptable if, and only if maxim is universalizable” (Shafer-Landau 162). The principle of universalizability means to say that an actions morality depends strongly on its intention. For example, someone cheating off of you on an exam. The person who cheated unjustly broke the rules, and violated our rights. It’s unfair and we feel like we got the short end of the stick. The other main component of the Kantian perspective is the principle of humanity. The principle of humanity states, “Always treat a human being… as an end, and never as a mere means” (Shafer-Landau 174). The principle of humanity defines the moral community in the Kantian perspective as any autonomous and rational being. The Kantian perspective focuses …show more content…
Because the Kantian perspective hold rationality and autonomy, the moral community excludes infants, the mentally disabled, and, of course, animals. This is because the principle of humanity’s definition of humanity, only includes autonomous and rationally beings. One of the arguments used to discredit the principle of humanity. the Argument against Animals, states the