Do regulators of animal welfare need to develop a theory of psychological well-being?
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):231-240 (2001)
| Abstract | The quest for a ``theory of nonhuman minds'''' to assessclaims about the moral status of animals is misguided. Misframedquestions about animal minds facilitate the appropriation ofanimal welfare by the animal user industry. When misframed, thesequestions shift the burden of proof unreasonably to animalwelfare regulators. An illustrative instance of misframing can befound in the US National Research Council''s 1998 publication thatreports professional efforts to define the psychologicalwell-being of nonhuman primates, a condition that the US 1985animal welfare act requires users of primates to promote. Thereport claims that ``psychological well-being'''' is a hypotheticalconstruct whose validity can only be determined by a theory thatdefines its properties and links it to observed data. Thisconception is used to contest common knowledge about animalwelfare by treating psychological well-being as a mentalcondition whose properties are difficult to discover. Thisframework limits regulatory efforts to treat animal subjects lessoppressively and serves the interests of the user industry.A more liberatory framework can be constructed by recognizing thecontested nature of welfare norms, where competing conceptions ofanimal welfare have implications about norm-setting authority, asit does in other regulatory contexts, e.g., food safety. Properlyconceptualized welfare should include both the avoidance ofdistressful circumstances and the relationship between ananimal''s capacities to engage in enjoyable activities and itsopportunities to exercise these capacities. This conception ofanimal welfare avoids appropriation by scientific experts. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesLennart Nordenfelt (2011). Health and Welfare in Animals and Humans. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):139-152.
L. J. Frewer, A. Kole, S. M. A. Van de Kroon & C. de Lauwere (2005). Consumer Attitudes Towards the Development of Animal-Friendly Husbandry Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (4).
Anne Algers, Berner Lindström & Edmond Pajor (2011). A New Format for Learning About Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):367-379.
Edmond A. Pajor (2011). A New Format for Learning About Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):367-379.
C. R. W. Spedding (2000). Animal Welfare. Earthscan Publications.
Gavrell Ortiz & Sara Elizabeth (2004). Beyond Welfare: Animal Integrity, Animal Dignity, and Genetic Engineering. Ethics and the Environment 9 (1):94-120.
Joel Marks (2011). Veterinarian, Heal Thy Profession. Philosophy Now 85 (85):47.
Kirsten Schmidt (2011). Concepts of Animal Welfare in Relation to Positions in Animal Ethics. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):153-171.
David J. Mellor (2009). The Sciences of Animal Welfare. Wiley-Blackwell.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads4 ( #178,800 of 549,528 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
