Kant is rarely considered fertile ground for ethical thought about nature. He escapes the scorn reserved for Descartes, as he recognizes, for example, that animals are living beings capable of suffering and that we should not be cruel to them. But he doesn't appear to go much beyond that. He argues that cruelty is wrong not because of the suffering it causes the animal, but because of the corrosive effect it has on one's own character. He speaks against the destruction of natural beauty for a similar reason; it is a violation of a duty to oneself. In general, he subordinates duties regarding nature to the duty to self to promote one's own virtue. This is in line with the principle that appears to pose the greatest stumbling block to a Kantian ethics of nature: one can have duties only to persons.
展开▼
