Journal of Ethics 9 (3-4):403 - 433 (2005)
|Abstract||Can material Egalitarianism (requiring, for example, the significant promotion of fortune) include animals in the domain of the equality requirement? The problem can be illustrated as follows: If equality of wellbeing is what matters, and normal mice are included in this egalitarian requirement, then normal mice have a much stronger claim to resources than almost any human. This is because normal mice have a much stronger claim to resources than almost any human. This is because their wellbeing is much lower than that of normal humans. Thus, equality of wellbeing requires a massive shift of resources away from most humans to mice. This view, however, seems crazy. I explore this problem and propose a solution.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
F. Barbara Orlans (2000). The Injustice of Excluding Laboratory Rats, Mice, and Birds From the Animal Welfare Act. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 10 (3):229-238.
Jeff McMahan (2008). Challenges to Human Equality. Journal of Ethics 12 (1):81 - 104.
Daniel W. Cunningham (1998). The Fine Structure of Real Mice. Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (3):937-994.
Meredith Williams (1980). Rights, Interests, and Moral Equality. Environmental Ethics 2 (2):149-161.
Paul Bloom (1998). Different Structures for Concepts of Individuals, Stuffs, and Real Kinds: One Mama, More Milk, and Many Mice. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):66-67.
Camilla Flodin (2011). Of Mice and Men: Adorno on Art and the Suffering of Animals. Estetika 48 (2):139-156.
Roger Caldwell (2003). Of Men and Mice. Philosophy Now 42:34-34.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #44,838 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,010 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?