18 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: John Hadley
  1. Elisa Aaltola & John Hadley (eds.) (2015). Animal Ethics and Philosophy: Questioning the Orthodoxy. Rowman & 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.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. John Hadley & Elisa Aaltola (eds.) (2015). 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.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. John Hadley (2013). Liberty and Valuing Sentient Life. Ethics and the Environment 18 (1):87-103.
    In “Do Animals have an Interest in Liberty?” Alasdair Cochrane brings some much needed attention to the ethics of animal confinement (2009a). Of particular significance is the question of whether confinement in itself is bad for nonhuman animal (hereafter, animal) well-being. If confinement conditions cause animals to suffer or frustrate their preferences it is safe to assume that liberty or freedom (following Cochrane, I use the terms interchangeably) would be instrumentally good for them. But, what about seemingly benign conditions of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. John Hadley (2012). Confining 'Disenhanced'Animals. NanoEthics 6 (1):41-46.
    Abstract Drawing upon evolutionary theory and the work of Daniel Dennett and Nicholas Agar, I offer an argument for broadening discussion of the ethics of disenhancement beyond animal welfare concerns to a consideration of animal “biopreferences”. Short of rendering animals completely unconscious or decerebrate, it is reasonable to suggest that disenhanced animals will continue to have some preferences. To the extent that these preferences can be understood as what Agar refers to as “plausible naturalizations” for familiar moral concepts like beliefs (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. John Hadley (2011). Telling It Like It Is: A Proposal to Improve Transparency in Biomedical Research. Between the Species 15 (1):7.
    Recent proposals to improve public communication about animal-based biomedical research have been narrowly focused on reforming biomedical journal submission guidelines. My suggestion for communication reform is broader in scope reaching beyond the research community to healthcare communicators and ultimately the general public. The suggestion is for researchers to provide journalists and public relations practitioners with concise summaries of their ‘animal use data’. Animal use data is collected by researchers and intended for the public record but is rarely, if ever, given (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. John Hadley (2010). Paying Their Way: Dissident Opinion, Advertising and Access to the Public Sphere. Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics 10 (1/2).
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. John Hadley (2009). Animal Rights and Self-Defense Theory. Journal of Value Inquiry 43 (2):165-177.
  8. John Hadley (2009). Animal Rights Extremism and the Terrorism Question. Journal of Social Philosophy 40 (3):363-378.
  9. John Hadley, Moral Responsibility for Harming Animals. Think.
    Third-party intervention has been the focus of recent debate in self-defense theory. When is it permissible for third-parties to intervene on behalf of an innocent victim facing an unjustified attack or threat? In line with recent self-defense theory, if an attacker is morally responsible for their actions and does not have an acceptable excuse then it is permissible for third-parties to use proportionate violence against them.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. John Hadley & Siobhan O'Sullivan (2009). World Poverty, Animal Minds and the Ethics of Veterinary Expenditure. Environmental Values 18 (3):361-378.
    In this paper we make an argument for limiting veterinary expenditure on companion animals. The argument combines two principles: the obligation to give and the self-consciousness requirement. In line with the former, we ought to give money to organisations helping to alleviate preventable suffering and death in developing countries; the latter states that it is only intrinsically wrong to painlessly kill an individual that is self-conscious. Combined, the two principles inform an argument along the following lines: rather than spending inordinate (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. John Hadley & Siobhan O' Sullivan (2009). World Poverty, Animal Minds and the Ethics of Veterinary Expenditure. Environmental Values 18 (3):361 - 378.
    In this paper we make an argument for limiting veterinary expenditure on companion animals. The argument combines two principles: the obligation to give and the self-consciousness requirement. In line with the former, we ought to give money to organisations helping to alleviate preventable suffering and death in developing countries; the latter states that it is only intrinsically wrong to painlessly kill an individual that is self-conscious. Combined, the two principles inform an argument along the following lines: rather than spending inordinate (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. John Hadley (2008). Ethics and the Beast - by Tzachi Zamir. Philosophical Books 49 (3):279-280.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. John Hadley (2007). Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory. Ethics and the Environment 12 (1):67-78.
    : J. Baird Callicott's claim to have unified environmentalism and animal liberation should be rejected by holists and liberationists. By making relations of intimacy necessary for moral considerability, Callicott excludes from the moral community nonhuman animals unable to engage in intimate relations due to the circumstances of their confinement. By failing to afford moral protection to animals in factory farms and research laboratories, Callicott's biosocial moral theory falls short of meeting a basic moral demand of liberationists. Moreover, were Callicott to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. John Hadley (2007). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy - by Julian H. Franklin. Philosophical Books 48 (2):187-188.
  15. John Hadley (2006). The Duty to Aid Nonhuman Animals in Dire Need. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (4):445–451.
    abstract Most moral philosophers accept that we have obligations to provide at least some aid and assistance to distant strangers in dire need. Philosophers who extend rights and obligations to nonhuman animals, however, have been less than explicit about whether we have any positive duties to free‐roaming or ‘wild’ animals. I argue our obligations to free‐roaming nonhuman animals in dire need are essentially no different to those we have to severely cognitively impaired distant strangers. I address three objections to the (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. John Hadley (2005). Excluding Destruction. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):22-29.
    In this paper I argue that the potentially environmentally destructive scope of a libertarian property rights regime can be narrowed by applying reasonable limits to those rights. I will claim that excluding the right to destroy from the libertarian property rights bundle is consistent with self-ownership and Robert Nozick’s interpretation of the Lockean proviso.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. John Hadley (2005). Nonhuman Animal Property: Reconciling Environmentalism and Animal Rights. Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (3):305–315.
  18. John Hadley (2004). Using and Abusing Others: A Reply to Machan. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 38 (3):411-414.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation