Search results for 'animal experimentation' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
See also:
  1. M. Fox & Animal Experimentation (1987). A Philosophers Changing Views. Between the Species 3 (2):55-80.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   46 citations  
  2.  36
    Roman Kolar (2006). Animal Experimentation. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):111-122.
    Millions of animals are used every year in oftentimes extremely painful and distressing scientific procedures. Legislation of animal experimentation in modern societies is based on the supposition that this is ethically acceptable when certain more or less defined formal (e.g. logistical, technical) demands and ethical principles are met. The main parameters in this context correspond to the “3Rs” concept as defined by Russel and Burch in 1959, i.e. that all efforts to replace, reduce and refine experiments must be (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  25
    Anders Nordgren (2002). Animal Experimentation: Pro and Con Arguments Using the Theory of Evolution. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):23-31.
    The theory of evolution has beenused in arguments regarding animalexperimentation. Two such arguments areanalyzed, one against and one in favor. Eachargument stresses the relevance of the theoryof evolution to normative ethics but attemptsexplicitly to avoid the so-called naturalisticfallacy.According to the argument against animalexperimentation, the theory of evolution`undermines' the idea of a special humandignity and supports `moral individualism'. Thelatter view implies that if it is wrong to usehumans in experiments, then it is also wrong touse animals, unless there are relevantdifferences between (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Ruth Friedman (ed.) (1987). Animal Experimentation and Animal Rights. Oryx Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Julia Tanner (2011). Rowlands, Rawlsian Justice and Animal Experimentation. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):569-587.
    Mark Rowlands argues that, contrary to the dominant view, a Rawlsian theory of justice can legitimately be applied to animals. One of the implications of doing so, Rowlands argues, is an end to animal experimentation. I will argue, contrary to Rowlands, that under a Rawlsian theory there may be some circumstances where it is justifiable to use animals as experimental test subjects (where the individual animals are benefited by the experiments).
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6.  36
    Nathan Nobis (2007). A Rational Defense of Animal Experimentation. Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):49-62.
    Many people involved in the life sciences and related fields and industries routinely cause mice, rats, dogs, cats, primates and other non-human animals to experience pain, suffering, and an early death, harming these animals greatly and not for their own benefit. Harms, however, require moral justification, reasons that pass critical scrutiny. Animal experimenters and dissectors might suspect that strong moral justification has been given for this kind of treatment of animals. I survey some recent attempts to provide such a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  10
    Corwin R. Kruse (1998). Who Said That? Status Presentation in Media Accounts of the Animal Experimentation Debate. Society and Animals 6 (3):235-243.
    In recent years, the issue of experimentation upon nonhuman animals has become the subject of media attention. One aspect of the media presentation is the status attributed to claims-makers on either side of the issue. Research suggests that perceived expertise of the source of arguments can play a role in attitudes formed by audiences. This study examines mainstream print and broadcast media presentation of the status of individuals quoted regarding the issue of animal experimentation. Those supporting continued (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  8
    Elizabeth S. Paul (1995). Us and Them : Scientists' and Animal Rights Campaigners' Views of the Animal Experimentation Debate. Society and Animals 3 (1):1-21.
    Animal rights campaigners and scientists working with animals completed anonymous questionnaires in which they were asked to report, not only on their own beliefs and ideas about the animal experimentation debate, but also on those they perceived the opposing group to hold. Both groups of participants tended to have a negative and somewhat extreme view of the other. But they did have an accurate grasp of the arguments and defenses commonly offered on both sides of the debate, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  24
    J. Martin (1990). The Rights of Man and Animal Experimentation. Journal of Medical Ethics 16 (3):160-161.
    Since emotions give contradictory signals about animal experimentation in medical science, man's relationship to animals must be based upon reason. Thomas Aquinas argues that man is essentially different from animals because man's intellectual processes show evidence of an abstract mechanism not possessed by animals. Man's rights arise in association with this essential difference. The consequence is that only man possesses true rights by Aquinas's definition; animals have them only by analogy. However, cruelty to animals is illicit and they (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  3
    Jane Johnson & Christopher Degeling (2011). Animals-as-Patients: Improving the Practice of Animal Experimentation. Between the Species 15 (1):4.
    In this paper we propose a new way of conceptualizing animals in experimentation – the animal-as-patient. Construing and treating animals as patients offers a way of successfully addressing some of the entrenched epistemological and ethical problems within a practice of animal experimentation directed to human clinical benefit. This approach is grounded in an epistemological insight and builds on work with so-called ‘pet models’. It relies upon the occurrence and characterization of analogous human and nonhuman animal (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  17
    Donna Yarri (2005). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation: A Critical Analysis and Constructive Christian Proposal. OUP Usa.
    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 human 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 (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  16
    Hayley Rose Glaholt (2012). Vivisection as War: The Moral Diseases of Animal Experimentation and Slavery in British Victorian Quaker Pacifist Ethics. Society and Animals 20 (2):154-172.
    This paper demonstrates how British Quakers, between 1870 and 1914, attempted to understand and debate the issue of vivisection through the lens of the Quaker peace testimony. Drawing on primary source materials, the article argues that these Friends were able to agitate for radical legislative and social change using virtue ethics as their framework. The paper further suggests that the moral parameters of the Quaker testimony for peace expanded briefly in this period to include interspecies as well as intraspecies engagement. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13.  39
    Nathan Nobis (forthcoming). So Why Does Animal Experimentation Matter? American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1).
    Frey sets the challenge for the other authors: to explain why, morally, no humans can be subject to the kinds of experiments that animals are subject to and to explain how researchers can reliablyuse animal models to understand and cure human disease. He thinks that the first challenge has not been met; the second challenge is, unfortunately, not directly addressed in this book. Adrian Morrison states that he “abhors” positions like Frey’s, Peter Singer’s and Tom Regan’s. He asserts that (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14.  51
    Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1994). Animal Experimentation: The Legacy of Claude Bernard. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 8 (3):195 – 210.
    Claude Bernard, the father of scientific physiology, believed that if medicine was to become truly scientiifc, it would have to be based on rigorous and controlled animal experiments. Bernard instituted a paradigm which has shaped physiological practice for most of the twentieth century. ln this paper we examine how Bernards commitment to hypothetico-deductivism and determinism led to (a) his rejection of the theory of evolution; (b) his minima/ization of the role of clinical medicine and epidemiological studies; and (c) his (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  15.  26
    Richard Hull, Philosophical Foundations of Animal Experimentation and its Critics.
    I come before you today at the invitation of your Colloquium Chair, Professor Claes Lundgren. It was his thought that a colloquium session devoted to some of the foundational questions, or presuppositions, of animal might prove interesting. Such an examination may have several aims. 1) It provides an opportunity to reflect on and review together a common activity that, in the perceptions of some concerned fellow citizens and in the history of the discipline of physiology, has had some highly (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  7
    Clifton P. Flynn (2011). Review For Our Children: The Ethics of Animal Experimentation in the Age of Genetic Engineering Nordgren Anders Rodopi Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Journal of Animal Ethics 1 (2):230-232.
  17. Regulations Governing (2008). Regulating Animal Experimentation. In Susan J. Armstrong & Richard George Botzler (eds.), The Animal Ethics Reader. Routledge 334.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  18
    Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1993). The Intact Systems Argument: Problems with the Standard Defense of Animal Experimentation. Southern Journal of Philosophy 31 (3):323-333.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   29 citations  
  19.  28
    Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1997). Brute Science: Dilemmas of Animal Experimentation. Routledge.
    "This book . . . is everything a philosophical tome should be: timely, important, factually informed, responsive to the scholarly literature, analytical, scrupulously fair, and rigorously, vigorously argued. It is, if I may say so, a model specimen of practical ethics." Keith Burgess-Jackson Ethics and the Environment).
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  20. 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.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Tom L. Beauchamp (1997). Opposing Views on Animal Experimentation: Do Animals Have Rights? Ethics and Behavior 7 (2):113 – 121.
    Animals have moral standing; that is, they have properties (including the ability to feel pain) that qualify them for the protections of morality. It follows from this that humans have moral obligations toward animals, and because rights are logically correlative to obligations, animals have rights.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  4
    Anita Guerrini (1989). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation in Seventeenth-Century England. Journal of the History of Ideas 50 (3):391.
  23.  44
    R. G. Frey (1996). Medicine, Animal Experimentation, and the Moral Problem of Unfortunate Humans. Social Philosophy and Policy 13 (2):181.
    We live in an age of great scientific and technological innovation, and what seemed out of the question or at least very doubtful only a few years ago, today lies almost within our grasp. In no area is this more true than that of human health care, where lifesaving and life-enhancing technologies have given, or have the enormous potential in the not so distant future to give, relief from some of the most terrible human illnesses. On two fronts in particular, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24.  28
    Nathan Nobis (2003). So Why Does Animal Experimentation Matter? Review of Ellen Frankel Paul and Jeffrey Paul, Eds. 2001. Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research. American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):1 – 2.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  9
    David Sztybel (2006). A Living Will Clause for Supporters of Animal Experimentation. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2):173–189.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  26. Michael Allen Fox (1988). The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective. University of California Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  27. Abul Fadl Mohsin Ebrahim (2001). Organ Transplantation, Euthanasia, Cloning and Animal Experimentation an Islamic View.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28. Alastair Norcross (2007). Animal Experimentation. In Bonnie Steinbock (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Oxford University Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29.  8
    P. Komesaroff (1992). Bioethics and Nature: The Case of Animal Experimentation. Thesis Eleven 32 (1):55-75.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  1
    Aysha Akhtar (2015). The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):407-419.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  24
    P. R. Sedgwick (1994). Animal Experimentation: The Moral Issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 20 (1):59-59.
  32.  12
    Gail A. Van Norman (2010). Animal Subjects Research Part II: Ethics of Animal Experimentation. In G. A. van Norman, S. Jackson, S. H. Rosenbaum & S. K. Palmer (eds.), Clinical Ethics in Anesthesiology. Cambridge University Press
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  9
    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.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  2
    Elisabeth Ormandy (2015). The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experimentation. The European Legacy 20 (6):681-683.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  22
    Michael Wreen & Peter Amadio (1987). The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective Michael Allen Fox Berkeley, Ca: University of California Press, 1986. Pp. Xiv, 262. $18.95. [REVIEW] Dialogue 26 (3):597.
  36.  1
    Strachan Donnelley (1989). Speculative Philosophy, the Troubled Middle, and the Ethics of Animal Experimentation. Hastings Center Report 19 (2):15-21.
  37.  14
    Peter C. Grosvenor (2003). Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research (Review). Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 46 (3):465-468.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  17
    David Benatar (1999). Hugh LaFollette and Niall Shanks, Brute Science: Dilemmas of Animal Experimentation:Brute Science: Dilemmas of Animal Experimentation. Ethics 110 (1):207-211.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Susan Finsen (1987). Michael Allen Fox, The Case for Animal Experimentation: An Evolutionary and Ethical Perspective Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 7 (10):403-405.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Doug Simak (1992). Robert M. Baird and Stuart E. Rosenbaum, Eds., Animal Experimentation: The Moral Issues Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 12 (1):1-3.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  3
    Hope R. Ferdowsian & Tom L. Beauchamp (2013). Animal Experimentation. In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  3
    Michael Allen Fox (1987). Animal Experimentation: A Philosopher's Changing Views. Between the Species 3 (2):3.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  4
    J. W. Guzek (1999). Human-Animal Relationship: Human Health and Animal Experimentation. Dialogue and Universalism 9:83-96.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  5
    Simon Festing (2008). On the Necessity for Animal Experimentation. Bioessays 30 (1):94-95.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  2
    Linda Baggott la Velle (2002). Animal Experimentation in Biomedical Research. In J. A. Bryant, Linda Baggott la Velle & John Searle (eds.), Bioethics for Scientists. Wiley
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  2
    I. Klingmann (2008). Animal Experimentation and Clinical Studies: Ethical Recommendations to Ensure Participants' Safety in Early Drug Development Results From an EFGCP Workshop Held in Brussels on 11 June 2008. Research Ethics 4 (4):167-169.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  7
    Denise Russell (1997). Animal Experimentation in Psychology and the Question of Scientific Merit. Ethics and the Environment 2 (1):43 - 52.
    Nonhuman animals are widely used in psychological research and the level of suffering and death is high. This is usually said to be justified by appealing to the scientific merit of the research. This article looks at notions of scientific merit, queries whether they are as clear-cut as commonly supposed, and argues that with contemporary conceptions it is too easy for any research to count as meritorious. A tightening of the notion of scientific merit is suggested, providing a ground for (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  4
    Stephen R. Latham (2012). US Law and Animal Experimentation: A Critical Primer. Hastings Center Report 42 (s1):S35 - S39.
  49.  2
    Charles K. Fink (1991). Animal Experimentation and the Argument From Limited Resources. Between the Species 7 (2):8.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  6
    Daniel A. Dombrowski (1992). Animal Experimentation. Teaching Philosophy 15 (3):291-292.
1 — 50 / 1000