1. Are anthropocentric ways of doing ethics intrinsically unethical Kant proposed that human life was intrinsically more valuable than other animal life because humans are rational beings. Kant proposed that human life was intrinsically more valuable than other animal life because humans are rational beings. This quality made humans unique according to Kant, and made each human life infinitely valuable. This quality made humans unique according to Kant, and made each human life infinitely valuable. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Kant would consider the welfare of humans to be the proper focus of any ethical response to question “How can we care for environment best?”. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Kant would consider the welfare of humans to be the proper focus of any ethical response to question “How can we care for environment best?”.

2. Kant’s thinking is clearly anthropocentric ….. because it places human welfare at the centre of environment ethics. ….. because it places human welfare at the centre of environment ethics. The welfare of other life forms, or the earth is instrumental to human welfare. The welfare of other life forms, or the earth is instrumental to human welfare. The philosopher Peter Singer argues that an approach like this is intrinsically unethical. The philosopher Peter Singer argues that an approach like this is intrinsically unethical.

3. Singer argues that There is no logical reason to regard human life as more valuable than any other form of sentient life. There is no logical reason to regard human life as more valuable than any other form of sentient life. He insists that animal life, the earth and the environment have intrinsic worth, and not just instrumental worth as Kant assumes. He insists that animal life, the earth and the environment have intrinsic worth, and not just instrumental worth as Kant assumes. He calls the view that human life is intrinsically more valuable than everything else “speciesism”. He calls the view that human life is intrinsically more valuable than everything else “speciesism”. He says that “speciesism” is simply prejudice and discrimination and is therefore unethical as a basis for environmental ethics. He says that “speciesism” is simply prejudice and discrimination and is therefore unethical as a basis for environmental ethics.