You’re telling me motive makes a bad thing okay to do under deontology? In other words, it’s okay for a deontologist to murder someone if they have a cool motive?
I dunno I thought Kant said you should never do bad things even if you have a good reason.
Imo, Kant’s principles don’t really apply in this scenario, the Categorical Imperative applies to human-to-human treatment. Kant’s primary principle is act as such it would become universal law. Animal consumption is already a universal law.
Murder (of a human) is wrong because when applied universally, then society collapses. Theft is wrong because when applied universally, the right of property, and therefore society, collapses.
Animal consumption doesn’t cause societal collapse.
Animal consumption causes factory farming, and farming causes chickens to develop stress-induced autophagia. I don’t like it when the chickens are so unhappy they eat themselves and need to be debeaked. We should all stop doing things that cause that.
You’re telling me motive makes a bad thing okay to do under deontology? In other words, it’s okay for a deontologist to murder someone if they have a cool motive?
I dunno I thought Kant said you should never do bad things even if you have a good reason.
Imo, Kant’s principles don’t really apply in this scenario, the Categorical Imperative applies to human-to-human treatment. Kant’s primary principle is act as such it would become universal law. Animal consumption is already a universal law.
Murder (of a human) is wrong because when applied universally, then society collapses. Theft is wrong because when applied universally, the right of property, and therefore society, collapses.
Animal consumption doesn’t cause societal collapse.
Thoughts?
Animal consumption causes factory farming, and farming causes chickens to develop stress-induced autophagia. I don’t like it when the chickens are so unhappy they eat themselves and need to be debeaked. We should all stop doing things that cause that.
no, it doesn’t