Abstract
People who like animal products but believe it is wrong to consume them are often so demoralized by the apparent inefficacy of their individual, private choices that they are unable to resist. Although he was a deontologist, Kant was also aware of this ‘consequent-dependent’ side of our moral psychology. One version of his ‘moral proof’ is designed to respond to the threat of such demoralization in pursuit of the Highest Good. It provides a model for a contemporary, secular argument regarding what is permitted in order to sustain resolve in contemporary industrial contexts (like that of industrial animal agriculture). The argument’s conclusion is that one of the things we can rationally hold, as an item of defeasible moral faith, is a certain decision-theoretic principle regarding what it is to ‘make a difference’.aesthetics, and the ethics of belief.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Kant and Animals |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
| Pages | 213-238 |
| Number of pages | 26 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9780191892325 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9780198859918 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 2020 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- General Arts and Humanities
Keywords
- Animal agriculture
- Decision theory
- Despair
- Difference-making
- Faith
- Food industry
- Hope
- Kant
- Moral psychology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Hope and Despair at the Kantian Chicken Factory: Moral Arguments about Making a Difference'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver