Theexecutive,
I don't think applying Kant to today's world is doing a disservice to anyone. Sartre didn't seem to think there was a problem with it when he smuggled it into existentialism is a humanism.
However, as you are someone who obviously thinks there is an ethical problem with dog fighting I am interested in your reasoning behind such a stance and would gladly turn this discussion away from Kant if you wanted to present an alternative ethical position.
Theexecutive,
The fact that Kant considers the human/animal interaction outside ethics is the very reason why his philosophy should be used to consider Vic's situation, particularly when people are arguing for an ethical judgement of a human based on his treatment of an animal.
PS360rocks,
The problem that I have with your argument is that there is no consistency to your stance. Animals can be killed as long as its not cruel? Or animals can be tr...
360Sheep,
I'm glad you liked the argument. I did, however, address societies position on dogs when I discussed legality, which in our society is supposedly decided by the people. I am, however, much more interested in the ethical philosophy of vic's case then its legality.
And you should give philosophy a try, it can be quite fun to have a rational basis for your actions.
I think we should consider andapual88's argument a bit more before we start making ad hominem attacks in order to disprove it.
From an ethical standpoint he seems to be on very solid footing. Consider: Kantian ethical philosophy is hierarchical, with a very clear delineation between God, Humans and Animals. The relationship that exists between each group determines plays a large part in determining the moral worth of the action.
For example, any human to human ...
ps360rocks,
I'm glad you clarified. I respect the divine command theory of ethics and have no interest in dissuading you from having a philosophy and standing by it.
However, if you are going to use the bible to defend your position on animal cruelty I suggest you also read what it has to say about how humans should treat humans and then compare that with your stance on animal cruelty and see if they are compatible.