The question of whether and to what extent animals have minds is a key problem for philosophy, cognitive and animal science, and lived experience as a whole. This problem, which will be called the Problem of Animality , concerns whether animals can be said to have the attributes of consciousness, thinking, moral worth, and other fundamental concepts.
The modern approach to what will be called the Problem of Animality had its genesis with the philosopher Rene Descartes. The Problem of Animality was not a question in itself for Descartes, but instead, a question that was answered through the application of his modern epistemology. Descartes believed the animal was merely automata, unable to speak, think, or be conscious. Philosophers following him, most notably Kant, broadly accepted this conception, and Kant’s own ethical theory contains a similar notion.
This paper will present a genealogy of German thought from Kant as it\u27s point of departure, applying Hegel\u27s, Husserl\u27s, and Heidegger\u27s systems of thought to questions of animal minds. The paper will examine whether or not the three other philosophers in question (Hegel, Husserl and Heidegger)\u27s thoughts contain broad Cartesian tendencies by comparing their systems\u27 views of animals to Descartes\u27 and Kant\u27s own.
The paper will begin by detailing Kant\u27s ethical views on obligations toward animals and Hegel\u27s reaction against Kantian ethics. It will rely on secondary sources that extrapolate Hegel\u27s views on animals from his thought. From there, it will inquire into whether Hegel escaped from the Cartesian picture of the animal or not. What will be illuminated is another part of the Problem of Animality, a question of Otherness and phenomenology.
This question will lead us to Husserl, which we will compare with Descartes and Kant before him. The essay will then examine early Heidegger\u27s synthesis and reaction against his mentor Husserl, and his concept of the Destruktion of Descartes, the animals poverty-in-the-world, and whether or not his thought on the animal constitutes a destruction of the Cartesian tradition.https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/fsrs2020/1040/thumbnail.jp
