Under a certain description, Immanuel Kant appears like an intellectual ancestor of today’s animal rights movement.1 Here we have a philosopher who insists that duty trumps self-interest. That we should treat others according to rational principles, not momentary appetites. That moral responsibility arises from the capacity to determine our own actions auton-omously—not from tradition, a self-interested contract with other human beings, or the commands of a human-shaped God. That we should exer-cise self-control. That we should not exalt ourselves above others. That we should cultivate sympathy and act on it. Even—though this is less widely known—that we should adopt the happiness of others, along with our own moral integrity, as the supreme ends of our actions. Do today’s ethi-cal vegans and animal advocates not think along these lines? I know I do. Us friends of animals may disagree with the eighteenth-century Prussian professor on what exactly our duties are, but our movement takes a gen-eral view of morality that seems to hew close to his. So we might draw great benefit from considering our own moral thinking through the lens of Kant’s philosophical framework of notions, distinctions, and argu-ments. For one thing, better understanding our own moral thinking helps us remain critical and inquisitive. But it is also crucial when trying to con-vince others.