Search results for 'Animal Ethics' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
See also:
  1. Bernard E. Rollin (2006). The Regulation of Animal Research and the Emergence of Animal Ethics: A Conceptual History. [REVIEW] Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):285-304.
    The history of the regulation of animal research is essentially the history of the emergence of meaningful social ethics for animals in society. Initially, animal ethics concerned itself solely with cruelty, but this was seen as inadequate to late 20th-century concerns about animal use. The new social ethic for animals was quite different, and its conceptual bases are explored in this paper. The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 represented a very minimal and in many (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  2.  37
    Frank Kupper & Tjard Cock Bunindeg (2011). Deliberating Animal Values: A Pragmatic—Pluralistic Approach to Animal Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (5):431-450.
    Debates in animal ethics are largely characterized by ethical monism, the search for a single, timeless, and essential trait in which the moral standing of animals can be grounded. In this paper, we argue that a monistic approach towards animal ethics hampers and oversimplifies the moral debate. The value pluralism present in our contemporary societies requires a more open and flexible approach to moral inquiry. This paper advocates the turn to a pragmatic, pluralistic approach to (...) ethics. It contributes to the development of such an approach in two ways. It offers a pragmatist critique of ethical monism in animal ethics and presents the results of a qualitative study into the value diversity present in the different ways of thinking about animals in the Netherlands. Carefully arranged group discussions resulted in the reconstruction of four distinctive moral value frameworks that may serve as instruments in the future process of moral inquiry and deliberation in the reflection on animal use. (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  3.  16
    Kirsten Persson & David Shaw (2015). Empirical Methods in Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (5):853-866.
    In this article the predominant, purely theoretical perspectives on animal ethics are questioned and two important sources for empirical data in the context of animal ethics are discussed: methods of the social and methods of the natural sciences. Including these methods can lead to an empirical animal ethics approach that is far more adapted to the needs of humans and nonhuman animals and more appropriate in different circumstances than a purely theoretical concept solely premised (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  7
    Alan Reynolds (2014). Animal Ethics and Politics Beyond the Social Contract. Les ateliers de l'éthique/The Ethics Forum 9 (3):208-222.
    Alan Reynolds: This paper is divided into three sections. First, I describe the wide plurality of views on issues of animal ethics, showing that our disagreements here are deep and profound. This fact of reasonable pluralism about animal ethics presents a political problem. According to the dominant liberal tradition of political philosophy, it is impermissible for one faction of people to impose its values upon another faction of people who reasonably reject those values. Instead, we are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  4
    Clare Palmer & Peter Sandoe (2011). Animal Ethics. In Michael Appleby, Barry Hughes, Joy Mench & Anna Ollson (eds.), Animal Welfare. CABI International 1-12.
    This chapter introduces ans discusses different views concerning our duties towards animals. First, we explain why we should engage in reasoning about animal ethics, rather than relying on intuitions or feelings alone. Secondly, we present and discuss five different kinds of views about the nature of our duties to animals. These are: contractarianism, utilitarianism, animal rights views, contextual views and what we call a "respect for nature" view. Finally, we briefly consider whether it is possible to combine (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. José Luis Bermúdez (2007). Thinking Without Words: An Overview for Animal Ethics. Journal of Ethics 11 (3):319-335.
    In Thinking without Words I develop a philosophical framework for treating some animals and human infants as genuine thinkers. This paper outlines the aspects of this account that are most relevant to those working in animal ethics. There is a range of different levels of cognitive sophistication in different animal species, in addition to limits to the types of thought available to non-linguistic creatures, and it may be important for animal ethicists to take this into account (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  9
    T. J. Kasperbauer (forthcoming). Mentalizing Animals: Implications for Moral Psychology and Animal Ethics. Philosophical Studies:1-20.
    Ethicists have tended to treat the psychology of attributing mental states to animals as an entirely separate issue from the moral importance of animals’ mental states. In this paper I bring these two issues together. I argue for two theses, one descriptive and one normative. The descriptive thesis holds that ordinary human agents use what are generally called phenomenal mental states to assign moral considerability to animals. I examine recent empirical research on the attribution of phenomenal states and agential states (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  29
    T. J. Kasperbauer (2015). Rejecting Empathy for Animal Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (4):817-833.
    Ethicists have become increasingly skeptical about the importance of empathy in producing moral concern for others. One of the main claims made by empathy skeptics is a psychological thesis: empathy is not the primary psychological process responsible for producing moral concern. Some of the best evidence that could confirm or disconfirm this thesis comes from research on empathizing with animals. However, this evidence has not been discussed in any of the prominent critiques of empathy. In this paper, I investigate six (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. John Hadley & Elisa Aaltola (eds.) (2014). Animal Ethics and Philosophy: Questioning the Orthodoxy. Rowman and Littlefield International.
    Bringing together new theory and critical perspectives on a broad range of topics in animal ethics, this book examines the implications of recent developments in the various fields that bear upon animal ethics. Showcasing a new generation of thinkers, it exposes some important shortcomings in existing animal rights theory.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  11
    Evangelos D. Protopapadakis (ed.) (2012). Animal Ethics: Past and Present Perspectives. Logos Verlag.
    Philosophy, as Aristotle said, originates in wonder. And nonhuman animals have long been a source of wonder to humans, especially in regard to the treatment they deserve. The upshot is that Western philosophy has been concerned with the way in which we ought to treat nonhuman animals since its origins with the pre-Socratic philosophers. -/- Animal ethics is a highly challenging field, as well as one of the liveliest areas of debate in ethics in recent years. Not (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  9
    Alison Suen (2015). The Speaking Animal: Ethics, Language and the Human-Animal Divide. Rowman & Littlefield International.
    Engaging with the work of Freud, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, and Derrida, this book reconceptualises the language divide between humans and animals within the context of animal ethics.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Kelly Oliver (2010). Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness. Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
    The concepts of animal, human, and rights are all part of a philosophical tradition that trades on foreclosing the animal, animality, and animals. Rather than looking to qualities or capacities that make animals the same as or different from humans, I investigate the relationship between the human and the animal. To insist, as animal rights and welfare advocates do, that our ethical obligations to animals are based on their similarities to us reinforces the type of humanism (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  9
    Mark Coeckelbergh & David J. Gunkel (2016). Response to “The Problem of the Question About Animal Ethics” by Michal Piekarski. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (4):717-721.
    In this brief article we reply to Michal Piekarski’s response to our article ‘Facing Animals’ published previously in this journal. In our article we criticized the properties approach to defining the moral standing of animals, and in its place proposed a relational and other-oriented concept that is based on a transcendental and phenomenological perspective, mainly inspired by Heidegger, Levinas, and Derrida. In this reply we question and problematize Piekarski’s interpretation of our essay and critically evaluate “the ethics of commitment” (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  11
    Simon Christopher Timm (2016). Moral Intuition or Moral Disengagement? Cognitive Science Weighs in on the Animal Ethics Debate. Neuroethics 9 (3):225-234.
    In this paper I problematize the use of appeals to the common intuitions people have about the morality of our society’s current treatment of animals in order to defend that treatment. I do so by looking at recent findings in the field of cognitive science. First I will examine the role that appeals to common intuition play in philosophical arguments about the moral worth of animals, focusing on the work of Carl Cohen and Richard Posner. After describing the theory of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  4
    Denise Russell (2013). Animal Ethics Committee Guidelines and Shark Research. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (4):541-542.
  16.  52
    John Grey (2013). 'Use Them At Our Pleasure': Spinoza on Animal Ethics. History of Philosophy Quarterly 30 (4):367-388.
    Although Spinoza disagrees with Descartes's claim that animals are mindless, he holds that we may nevertheless treat them as we please because their natures are different from human nature. Margaret Wilson has questioned the validity of Spinoza's argument, since it is not clear why differences in nature should imply differences in ethical status. In this paper, I propose a new interpretation of Spinoza's argument that responds to Wilson's challenge. We have ethical commitments to other humans only because we share the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  35
    Joanne Sneddon & Bernard Rollin (2010). Mulesing and Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (4):371-386.
    People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) called for a ban on mulesing in the Australian sheep industry in 2004. Mulesing is a surgical procedure that removes wool-bearing skin from the tail and breech area of sheep in order to prevent flystrike (cutaneous myiasis). Flystrike occurs when flies lay their eggs in soiled areas of wool on the sheep and can be fatal for the sheep host. PETA claimed that mulesing subjects sheep to unnecessary pain and suffering and took (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18.  38
    Ramona Cristina Ilea (2009). The Animal Ethics Reader (2nd Edition). Teaching Philosophy 32 (1):83-86.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  16
    Misago Seth & Fredy Saguti (2012). Animal Research Ethics in Africa: Is Tanzania Making Progress? Developing World Bioethics 12 (3):158-162.
    The significance of animals in research cannot be over-emphasized. The use of animals for research and training in research centres, hospitals and schools is progressively increasing. Advances in biotechnology to improve animal productivity require animal research. Drugs being developed and new interventions or therapies being invented for cure and palliation of all sorts of animal diseases and conditions need to be tested in animals for their safety and efficacy at some stages of their development. Drugs and interventions (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  7
    Scott D. Churchill (2010). Book Review: Empathy, Intercorporeality, and the Call to Compassion. Ralph R. Acampora, Corporal Compassion: Animal Ethics and Philosophy of Body. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006. [REVIEW] Society and Animals 18 (2):219-225.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  1
    Clare Palmer (2006). Rethinking Animal Ethics in Appropriate Context: How Rolston's Work Can Help. In Christopher Preston & Wayne Ouderkirk (eds.), Nature, Value Duty: Life on Earth with Holmes Rolston, III. Springer 183-200.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  2
    Clare Palmer, Sandra Corr & Peter Sandoe (2015). Companion Animal Ethics. Wiley.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Gary E. Varner (1998). In Nature's Interests?: Interests, Animal Rights, and Environmental Ethics. Oxford University Press.
    This book offers a powerful response to what Varner calls the "two dogmas of environmental ethics"--the assumptions that animal rights philosophies and anthropocentric views are each antithetical to sound environmental policy. Allowing that every living organism has interests which ought, other things being equal, to be protected, Varner contends that some interests take priority over others. He defends both a sentientist principle giving priority to the lives of organisms with conscious desires and an anthropocentric principle giving priority to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   32 citations  
  24. Bernard E. Rollin (2007). Animal Mind: Science, Philosophy, and Ethics. Journal of Ethics 11 (3):253-274.
    Although 20th-century empiricists were agnostic about animal mind and consciousness, this was not the case for their historical ancestors – John Locke, David Hume, Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, and, of course, Charles Darwin and George John Romanes. Given the dominance of the Darwinian paradigm of evolutionary continuity, one would not expect belief in animal mind to disappear. That it did demonstrates that standard accounts of how scientific hypotheses are overturned – i.e., by empirical disconfirmation or by exposure (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  42
    Fredrik Karlsson (2012). Critical Anthropomorphism and Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (5):707-720.
    Anthropomorphism has long been considered a cardinal error when describing animals. Ethicists have feared the consequences of misrepresenting animals in their reasoning. Recent research within human- animal studies, however, has sophisticated the notion of anthropomorphism. It is suggested that avoiding anthropomorphism merely creates other morphisms, such as mechanomorphism. Instead of avoiding anthropomorphism, it is argued that it is a communicative strategy that should be used critically. Instances of anthropomorphism in animal ethics are analyzed in this paper. Some (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  26.  51
    M. Gjerris, C. Gamborg, H. Röcklinsberg & R. Anthony (2011). The Price of Responsibility: Ethics of Animal Husbandry in a Time of Climate Change. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):331-350.
    This paper examines the challenges that climate change raises for animal agriculture and discusses the contributions that may come from a virtue ethics based approach. Two scenarios of the future role of animals in farming are set forth and discussed in terms of their ethical implications. The paper argues that when trying to tackle both climate and animal welfare issues in farming, proposals that call for a reorientation of our ethics and technology must first and foremost (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Ralph R. Acampora (2014). Corporal Compassion: Animal Ethics and Philosophy of Body. University of Pittsburgh Press.
    Most approaches to animal ethics ground the moral standing of nonhumans in some appeal to their capacities for intelligent autonomy or mental sentience. _Corporal Compassion _emphasizes the phenomenal and somatic commonality of living beings; a philosophy of body that seeks to displace any notion of anthropomorphic empathy in viewing the moral experiences of nonhuman living beings. Ralph R. Acampora employs phenomenology, hermeneutics, existentialism and deconstruction to connect and contest analytic treatments of animal rights and liberation theory. In (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  28. Susan J. Armstrong & Richard George Botzler (eds.) (2008). The Animal Ethics Reader. Routledge.
    The Animal Ethics Reader is the first comprehensive, state-of-the-art anthology of readings on this substantial area of study and interest. A subject that regularly captures the headlines, the book is designed to appeal to anyone interested in tracing the history of the subject, as well as providing a powerful insight into the debate as it has developed. The recent wealth of material published in this area has not, until now, been collected in one volume. Readings are arranged thematically, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29.  34
    Jes Lynning Harfeld (2013). Telos and the Ethics of Animal Farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (3):691-709.
    The concept of animal welfare in confinement agriculture—and an ethical theory based upon this concept—necessitates an idea of what kind of being it is that fares well and what “well” is for this being. This double-question is at the heart of understanding and adequately defining welfare as qualitatively embedded in the experiencing subject. The notion of telos derives (philosophically) from Aristotle and is a way of accounting for the good life of an animal from the unique speciesness of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  65
    Bernard E. Rollin (2005). Reasonable Partiality and Animal Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8 (1-2):105-121.
    Moral psychology is often ignored in ethical theory, making applied ethics difficult to achieve in practice. This is particularly true in the new field of animal ethics. One key feature of moral psychology is recognition of the moral primacy of those with whom we enjoy relationships of love and friendship – philia in Aristotles term. Although a radically new ethic for animal treatment is emerging in society, its full expression is severely limited by our exploitative uses (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31.  6
    Rod Preece (2007). Thoughts Out of Season on the History of Animal Ethics. Society and Animals 15 (4):365-378.
    Contrary to conventional wisdom, the earlier Western tradition did not customarily deny souls per se to nonhuman animals; when it denied immortal souls to animals, it sometimes deemed that denial a reason for giving greater consideration to animals in their earthly existence. Nor has the Western tradition uniformly deemed animals intended for human use. Further, there was considerable opposition to the Cartesian view of animals as insentient machines, and—even among those who were convinced—it was not unknown for them to deem (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  27
    Nathan Nobis, Animals & Ethics 101: Thinking Critically About Animal Rights.
    This book provides an overview of the current debates about the nature and extent of our moral obligations to animals. Which, if any, uses of animals are morally wrong, which are morally permissible and why? What, if any, moral obligations do we, individually and as a society, have towards animals and why? How should animals be treated? Why? We will explore the most influential and most developed answers to these questions – given by philosophers, scientists, and animal advocates and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  7
    Jozef Keulartz (2016). Should the Lion Eat Straw Like the Ox? Animal Ethics and the Predation Problem. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (5):813-834.
    Stephen Clark’s article The Rights of Wild Things from 1979 was the starting point for the consideration in the animal ethics literature of the so-called ‘predation problem’. Clark examines the response of David George Ritchie to Henry Stephens Salt, the first writer who has argued explicitly in favor of animal rights. Ritchie attempts to demonstrate—via reductio ad absurdum—that animals cannot have rights, because granting them rights would oblige us to protect prey animals against predators that wrongly violate (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Ruth Abbey (2007). Rawlsian Resources for Animal Ethics. Ethics and the Environment 12 (1):1-22.
    : This article considers what contribution the work of John Rawls can make to questions about animal ethics. It argues that there are more normative resources in A Theory of Justice for a concern with animal welfare than some of Rawls's critics acknowledge. However, the move from A Theory of Justice to Political Liberalism sees a depletion of normative resources in Rawlsian thought for addressing animal ethics. The article concludes by endorsing the implication of A (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  35. Elisa Aaltola (2010). The Anthropocentric Paradigm and the Posibility of Animal Ethics. Ethics and the Environment 15 (1):pp. 27-50.
    Animal ethics has presented various 'pro-animal arguments' according to which non-human animals have a more significant moral status than traditionally assumed. Although these arguments (brought forward, for instance, by Peter Singer, Tom Regan, Mary Midgley, Stephen Clark, and Mark Rowlands) have been met with various forms of criticism, a quick overview of animal ethics literature suggests that they are difficult to overcome. Pro-animal arguments seem to have consistency and argumentative support on their side. However, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36. Colin Allen & Marc Bekoff (2007). Animal Minds, Cognitive Ethology, and Ethics. Journal of Ethics 11 (3):299-317.
    Our goal in this paper is to provide enough of an account of the origins of cognitive ethology and the controversy surrounding it to help ethicists to gauge for themselves how to balance skepticism and credulity about animal minds when communicating with scientists. We believe that ethicists’ arguments would benefit from better understanding of the historical roots of ongoing controversies. It is not appropriate to treat some widely reported results in animal cognition as if their interpretations are a (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Elisa Aaltola (2005). Animal Ethics and Interest Conflicts. Ethics and the Environment 10 (1):19-48.
    : Animal ethics has presented convincing arguments for the individual value of animals. Animals are not only valuable instrumentally or indirectly, but in themselves. Less has been written about interest conflicts between humans and other animals, and the use of animals in practice. The motive of this paper is to analyze different approaches to interest conflicts. It concentrates on six models, which are the rights model, the interest model, the mental complexity model, the special relations model, the multi-criteria (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38.  9
    Tony Lynch & Lesley McLean (2016). How to Do Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (4):597-606.
    Many think doing animal ethics demands we see moral humanism as a speciesist prejudice of the kind found with sexism and racism. The only serious case for this rests on the Argument from Marginal Cases. We find that argument to the point, but show that properly understood it supports humanism. Understanding why it does this lets us see how we ought to go on in animal ethics.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  5
    Michał Piekarski (2016). The Problem of the Question About Animal Ethics: Discussion with Mark Coeckelbergh and David Gunkel. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (4):705-715.
    In this article I discuss the thesis put forward by David Gunkel and Mark Coeckelbergh in their essay Facing Animals:A Relational, Other-Oriented Approach to Moral Standing. The authors believe that the question about the status of animals needs to be reconsidered. In their opinion, traditional attempts to justify the practice of ascribing rights to animals have been based on the search for what is common to animals and people. This popular conviction rests on the intuition according to which we tend (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  16
    M. Ideland (2009). Different Views on Ethics: How Animal Ethics is Situated in a Committee Culture. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (4):258-261.
    Research that includes non-human animal experimentation is fundamentally a dilemmatic enterprise. Humans use other animals in research to improve life for their own species. Ethical principles are established to deal with this dilemma. But despite this ethical apparatus, people who in one way or another work with animal experimentation have to interpret and understand the principles from their individual points of view. In interviews with members of Swedish animal ethics committees, different views on what the term (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41.  4
    Payam Moula & Per Sandin (2015). Empirical Methods in Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (5):853-866.
    In this article the predominant, purely theoretical perspectives on animal ethics are questioned and two important sources for empirical data in the context of animal ethics are discussed: methods of the social and methods of the natural sciences. Including these methods can lead to an empirical animal ethics approach that is far more adapted to the needs of humans and nonhuman animals and more appropriate in different circumstances than a purely theoretical concept solely premised (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  37
    Gregory S. McElwain (2009). Ethics of Animal Use. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (3):291-293.
  43.  12
    A. Lynch & L. McLean, How to Do Animal Ethics.
    Many think doing animal ethics demands we see moral humanism as a speciesist prejudice of the kind found with sexism and racism. The only serious case for this rests on the Argument from Marginal Cases. We find that argument to the point, but show that properly understood it supports humanism. Understanding why it does this lets us see how we ought to go on in animal ethics.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Kirsten Schmidt (2011). Concepts of Animal Welfare in Relation to Positions in Animal Ethics. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):153-171.
    When animal ethicists deal with welfare they seem to face a dilemma: On the one hand, they recognize the necessity of welfare concepts for their ethical approaches. On the other hand, many animal ethicists do not want to be considered reformist welfarists. Moreover, animal welfare scientists may feel pressed by moral demands for a fundamental change in our attitude towards animals. The analysis of this conflict from the perspective of animal ethics shows that animal (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  45.  13
    Frööding & Martin Peterson (2011). Animal Ethics Based on Friendship. Journal of Animal Ethics 1 (1):58-69.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  46. Richard Holton & Rae Langton (1998). Empathy and Animal Ethics. In Dale Jamieson (ed.), Singer and His Critics. Oxford
    In responding to the challenge that we cannot know that animals feel pain, Peter Singer says: We can never directly experience the pain of another being, whether that being is human or not. When I see my daughter fall and scrape her knee, I know that she feels pain because of the way she behaves—she cries, she tells me her knee hurts, she rubs the sore spot, and so on. I know that I myself behave in a somewhat similar—if more (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  47.  51
    Robert Heeger & Frans W. A. Brom (2001). Intrinsic Value and Direct Duties: From Animal Ethics Towards Environmental Ethics? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):241-252.
    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, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  48.  1
    Denise Russell, Why Animal Ethics Committees Don't Work.
    Animal ethics committees have been set up in many countries as a way to scrutinize animal experimentation and to assure the public that if animals are used in research then it is for a worthwhile cause and suffering is kept to a minimum. The ideals of Refinement, Reduction and Replacement are commonly upheld. However while refinement and reduction receive much attention in animal ethics committees the replacement of animals is much more difficult to incorporate into (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  49. Colin Allen (2006). Ethics and the Science of Animal Minds. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):375-394.
    Ethicists have commonly appealed to science to bolster their arguments for elevating the moral status of nonhuman animals. I describe a framework within which I take many ethicists to be making such appeals. I focus on an apparent gap in this framework between those properties of animals that are part of the scientific consensus, and those to which ethicists typically appeal in their arguments. I will describe two different ways of diminishing the appearance of the gap, and argue that both (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  50. Matthew Calarco (2004). Deconstruction is Not Vegetarianism: Humanism, Subjectivity, and Animal Ethics. Continental Philosophy Review 37 (2):175-201.
    This essay examines Jacques Derrida’s contribution to recent debates in animal philosophy in order to explore the critical promise of his work for contemporary discourses on animal ethics and vegetarianism. The essay is divided into two sections, both of which have as their focus Derrida’s interview with Jean-Luc Nancy entitled “‘Eating Well’, or the Calculation of the Subject.” My task in the initial section is to assess the claim made by Derrida in this interview that Levinas’s work (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000