Res Publica 13 (3) (2007)
|Abstract||This paper examines whether non-human animals have a moral right not to be experimented upon. It adopts a Razian conception of rights, whereby an individual possesses a right if an interest of that individual is sufficient to impose a duty on another. To ascertain whether animals have a right not to be experimented on, three interests are examined which might found such a right: the interest in not suffering, the interest in staying alive, and the interest in being free. It is argued that while the first two of these interests are sufficient to ground animal rights against being killed and made to suffer by experiments, the interest in freedom does not ground a general animal right not to be used in experimentation.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Paul Waldau (2010). Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press.
David Sztybel (2001). Animal Rights: Autonomy and Redundancy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (3):259-273.
Claire Molloy (2011). Popular Media and Animals. Palgrave Macmillan.
Uriah Kriegel (forthcoming). Animal Rights: A Non‐Consequentialist Approach. In K. Petrus & M. Wild (eds.), Animal Minds and Animal Morals.
David DeGrazia (1996). Taking Animals Seriously: Mental Life and Moral Status. Cambridge University Press.
Marna A. Owen (2009). Animal Rights: Noble Cause or Needless Effort? Twenty-First Century Books.
Elisa Aaltola (2005). Animal Ethics and Interest Conflicts. Ethics and the Environment 10 (1):19-48.
Steve F. Sapontzis (1982). The Moral Significance of Interests. Environmental Ethics 4 (4):345-358.
Mark Rowlands (2009). Animal Rights: Moral Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads87 ( #8,282 of 549,062 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,703 of 549,062 )
How can I increase my downloads?