David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):241-252 (2001)
Three types of concern for animal welfare are widelyheld: Animals should feel well, they should function well, andthey should lead natural lives. The paper deals with a well-knownanswer to the question of why such concerns are morallyappropriate: Human beings have direct duties towards animals,because animals are beings that can flourish, the flourishing ofanimals is intrinsically or inherently valuable, and that whichis conducive to their flourishing is a legitimate object of moralconcern. Looking for a tenable conception of direct dutiestowards animals, the following questions are discussed: Whatshould we take it to mean that ``animal flourishing isintrinsically or inherently valuable?'''' Under what conditions doesa living being''s ability to flourish create direct duties towardsthis being? Is awareness or sentience required for there to bedirect duties towards a living being? Does such a requirementimply that moral concerns for animals would be limited to theirfeeling well, or does it also give way to having moral concernsfor their functioning well and leading natural lives? Can onetake into account considered judgements that claim that towardsdifferent animals we have moral duties that differ in kind and/orstrength? If environmental ethics cannot be based on theconception of direct duties here discussed, should one draw adistinction between duties towards ourselves, our fellow humanbeings, or animals, and duties regarding plants, or collectiveentities such as populations, species, and ecosystems?
|Keywords||duties towards animals Rollin Taylor|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Terence J. Centner (2010). Limitations on the Confinement of Food Animals in the United States. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (5):469-486.
Rebekah Humphreys (2010). Game Birds: The Ethics of Shooting Birds for Sport. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 4 (1):52 – 65.
R. B. M. deVries (2008). Intrinsic Value and the Genetic Engineering of Animals. Environmental Values 17 (3):375-392.
Similar books and articles
Richard A. Watson (1979). Self-Consciousness and the Rights of Nonhuman Animals and Nature. Environmental Ethics 1 (2):99-129.
Roy W. Perrett (1997). The Analogical Argument for Animal Pain. Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (1):49-58.
Ellen-Marie Forsberg (2011). Inspiring Respect for Animals Through the Law? Current Development in the Norwegian Animal Welfare Legislation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):351-366.
Donna Yarri (2005). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation: A Critical Analysis and Constructive Christian Proposal. OUP USA.
Albert W. Musschenga (2002). Naturalness: Beyond Animal Welfare. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (2):171-186.
Patrick Kain (2010). Duties Regarding Animals. In Lara Denis (ed.), Kant's Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press. 210--233.
Lara Denis (2000). Kant's Conception of Duties Regarding Animals: Reconstruction and Reconsideration. History of Philosophy Quarterly 17 (4):405-23.
Tom Regan (1980). Animal Rights, Human Wrongs. Environmental Ethics 2 (2):99-120.
Robert Bass (2006). Undermining Indirect Duty Theories. Between the Species (6):1.
Steve Cooke (2011). Duties to Companion Animals. Res Publica 17 (3):261-274.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads38 ( #43,235 of 1,096,839 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #53,739 of 1,096,839 )
How can I increase my downloads?