David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
OUP USA (2005)
The ethical treatment of animals has become an issue of serious moral concern. Many people are challenging long-held assumptions about animals and raising questions about their status and their treatment. What is the relationship between humans and animals? Do animals have moral standing? Do we have direct or indirect duties to animals? Does human benefit always outweigh animal suffering? The use of animals for experimentation raises all of these questions in a particularly insistent way. Donna Yarri offers an overview of the current state of the discussion, and presents an argument for significantly restricted animal experimentation. She points to the important similarities between humans and animals, arguing that the actual differences are differences of degree rather than kind. For that reason, she says, we must rethink our use of animals in experimentation. Animal cognition and animal sentiency together are the basis for the argument that experimental animals do have rights, which Yarri here enumerates. Christian theology, she shows, supports the existence of animal rights and contains additional resources within which a more humane animal experimentation can be worked out. Animal experimentation is not completely ruled out, and Yarri provides a model for what benign experimentation would look like. She concludes with a concrete burden-benefit analysis that can serve as the foundation for informed decision-making.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$4.36 used (94% off) $4.52 new (94% off) $45.00 direct from Amazon (36% off) Amazon page|
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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Mark H. Bernstein (2004). Without a Tear: Our Tragic Relationship with Animals. University of Illinois Press.
Nathan Nobis (2007). A Rational Defense of Animal Experimentation. Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):49-62.
Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1995). Util-Izing Animals. Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):13-25.
Jac A. A. Swart (2004). The Wild Animal as a Research Animal. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):181-197.
Irene Sonia Switankowsly (2012). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation: A Critical Analysis and Constructive Christian Proposal. By Donna Yarri. Pp. Xii, 220, Oxford University Press, 2005, $4.70. [REVIEW] Heythrop Journal 53 (5):872-873.
D. Clough (2007). Book Review: Donna Yarri, The Ethics of Animal Experimentation: A Critical Analysis and Constructive Christian Proposal (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005). Xii + 220 Pp. N.P. (Hb), ISBN 0 19 518179. [REVIEW] Studies in Christian Ethics 20 (3):449-452.
Kelly Oliver (2010). Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness. Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
Tom L. Beauchamp (1997). Opposing Views on Animal Experimentation: Do Animals Have Rights? Ethics and Behavior 7 (2):113 – 121.
Julia Tanner (2011). Rowlands, Rawlsian Justice and Animal Experimentation. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):569-587.
Kay Peggs (2012). Animals and Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Claire Molloy (2011). Popular Media and Animals. Palgrave Macmillan.
Joel Marks (2011). On Due Recognition of Animals Used in Research. Journal of Animal Ethics 1 (1):6-8.
Added to index2012-01-31
Total downloads7 ( #185,584 of 1,101,088 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #116,335 of 1,101,088 )
How can I increase my downloads?