A Kantian Perspective on Climate Change: the Role of the Kingdom of Ends for the Threat of the End of the Kingdom.

The global challenges we currently face are very different to those faced in Kant’s time. This could lead some to regard Kant’s philosophy as lacking relevance for contemporary issues. This paper argues that aspects of Kant’s philosophical, political, and religious writings can help us orient ourselves toward issues such as tackling climate change. Kant regarded the apparent harmony and design of nature as the strongest theoretical argument for the existence of God. This Physico-Theological argument established “an architect of the world” (CPR A624/B652), but not an infinite creator. This appeal to nature as harmonious and designed might be less apparent given the environmental crises of our time. However Kant was aware of the impact of natural disasters in his time, for instance he provided an examination of the Lisbon Earthquake in 1755. His treatment of the Lisbon earthquake is indicative of the systematic relationship Kant develops throughout his critical philosophy between philosophy, science, politics, and religion. He attempted to explain the cause of the Earthquake scientifically, and suggested ways of rebuilding Lisbon to minimise the damage of potential future earthquakes. His concerns were primarily how our scientific understanding of earthquakes could be utilised to ensure the future safety for those regions that were susceptible to earthquakes. There are many assumptions about how society ought to respond to natural disasters within Kant’s discussion of the Lisbon earthquake which are developed in his critical philosophy. Central to both Kant’s political and religious philosophies is the concern that our actions at both individual and societal levels should be for the sake of the moral law. Inherent to political philosophy is deployment of coercive instruments of the State to ensure that citizens will act in a lawful way. The goal of Kant’s philosophy of religion is for humanity to go beyond the merely juridical civil society that is dependent on coercion to enforce its laws, and to become a member of an ethical civil society. This is supported from Williams’ interpretation of Kant’s political philosophy as ultimately grounded in perpetual peace. According to Williams ‘perpetual peace cannot be achieved by political and legal means alone, so the success of Kant’s plan for perpetual peace depends on the moral progress of man’ (Williams, 1983, p.261). Climate change can be understood as a threat that demands that we consider ourselves primarily as members of an ethical commonwealth due to its global significance. Kant’s philosophy can offer support to the claim that climate change should not be treated merely as a political issue. The problem with treating climate change as a political issue is that it means that society considers the problem only in relation to the restrictions on their freedom enforced by juridical law. Climate change is a challenge to perpetual peace in the sense that it threatens humanity’s ability to achieve an ethical commonwealth.