Kantian Perspective On 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. Many people see pets as 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 way animals are deserving of right 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

Kant, himself thought is was wrong to abuse animals. But he only thought so, because he thought that if someone torture animals then it would extend to our fellow humans. This was his way of arguing against animal abuse, but still maintaining the idea that humans have more moral standing than animals. This argument is very shaky, because it relies completely on a prediction of how humans act, which is a consequentialist way of looking at the issue, the opposite of Kant’s view. Also as someone who has worked in the veterinary field for four years, I know that there are correlations between animal abuse and violence towards other humans, especially domestic violence. However it’s probably not plausible to say that the animal abuse causes domestic violence. Because Kant’s argument against animal abuse is not a plausible argument, animals only have protection from other people that are not their owners. In order words animals in the Kantian perspective are merely possessions. Since my animals are my possessions, the Kantians see nothing wrong with me murdering or abusing my animals.

Why Kantians Should Be Interested in Animal

Infants grow up to be rational, and the mentally disabled can be taught to think more rationally. However animals have a harder time claiming a spot at the table, so to speak. Of animals will never be close to a human’s ability to think rationally, but many animals do have some forms of rationally thinking. Remember the example of someone cheating on exam and we felt cheated, apparently our canine friends feel the same way. Researcher Friederike Range from the University of Vienna did a study with dogs who knew how to shake. At first two dogs, side by side, were asked the command and both obligated, with or without reward. Then the researcher switched so that only one of the dogs got a treat after performing the same task. The dogs that were denied a treat after performing the tricks were uncooperative and impatient. Finally they stop cooperating what so ever. The dogs in this showed an ability to judge what they thought is fair, in words they seem to have some capacity for moral reasoning (Milius).

A similar experiment was done in 2003 by researcher and professor Frans de Waal with monkeys. Two monkeys were asked to hand rocks to researchers which they happily did for a piece of cucumber. Then researchers began to give one of the monkeys a grape instead of cucumber. When the other monkey saw the difference, it would throw the food and rock