Switch to: References

Citations of:

Animal Ethics in Context

Columbia University Press (2010)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Agency and Moral Status.Jeff Sebo - 2017 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (1):1-22.
    According to our traditional conception of agency, most human beings are agents and most, if not all, nonhuman animals are not. However, recent developments in philosophy and psychology have made it clear that we need more than one conception of agency, since human and nonhuman animals are capable of thinking and acting in more than one kind of way. In this paper, I make a distinction between perceptual and propositional agency, and I argue that many nonhuman animals are perceptual agents (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Zoopolis. A Political Renewal of Animal Rights Theories.Christiane Bailey - 2013 - Dialogue:1-13.
    Book Panel on Zoopolis including articles by Clare Palmer, Dinesh Wadiwel and Laura Janara and a reply by Donaldson and Kymlicka.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Epistemic Injustice Expanded: A Feminist, Animal Studies Approach.Rebecca Dayna Tuvel - unknown
    In this dissertation, I argue that an account of epistemic injustice sensitive to interlocking oppressions must take us beyond injustice to human knowers. Although several feminist epistemologists argue for the incorporation of all forms of oppression into their analyses, feminist epistemology remains for the most part an anthropocentric enterprise. Yet insofar as a reduction to animal irrationality has been central to the epistemic injustice of both humans and animals, I propose that in addition to axes of gender, race, class and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Adventures in Moral Consistency: How to Develop an Abortion Ethic Through an Animal Rights Framework.Cheryl E. Abbate - 2015 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (1):145-164.
    In recent discussions, it has been argued that a theory of animal rights is at odds with a liberal abortion policy. In response, Francione (1995) argues that the principles used in the animal rights discourse do not have implications for the abortion debate. I challenge Francione’s conclusion by illustrating that his own framework of animal rights, supplemented by a relational account of moral obligation, can address the moral issue of abortion. I first demonstrate that Francione’s animal rights position, which grounds (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Vulnerability, Dependence, and Special Obligations to Domesticated Animals: A Reply to Palmer.Eli Weber - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (4):683-694.
    Clare Palmer has recently argued that most humans have special obligations to assist domesticated animals, because domestication creates vulnerable, dependent individuals, and most humans benefit from the institution of domestication. I argue that Palmer has given us no grounds for accepting this claim, and that one of the key premises in her argument for this claim is false. Next, I argue that voluntarism, which is the view that one acquires special obligations only by consenting to those obligations in some way, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A “Practical” Ethic for Animals.David Fraser - 2012 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (5):721-746.
    Abstract Drawing on the features of “practical philosophy” described by Toulmin ( 1990 ), a “practical” ethic for animals would be rooted in knowledge of how people affect animals, and would provide guidance on the diverse ethical concerns that arise. Human activities affect animals in four broad ways: (1) keeping animals, for example, on farms and as companions, (2) causing intentional harm to animals, for example through slaughter and hunting, (3) causing direct but unintended harm to animals, for example by (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Harm in the Wild: Facing Non-Human Suffering in Nature. [REVIEW]Beril İdemen Sözmen - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1075-1088.
    The paper is concerned with whether the reductio of the natural-harm-argument can be avoided by disvaluing non-human suffering and death. According to the natural-harm-argument, alleviating the suffering of non-human animals is not a moral obligation for human beings because such an obligation would also morally prescribe human intervention in nature for the protection of non-human animal interests which, it claims, is absurd. It is possible to avoid the reductio by formulating the moral obligation to alleviate non-human suffering and death with (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Nussbaum and the Capacities of Animals.T. J. Kasperbauer - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):977-997.
    Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach emphasizes species-specific abilities in grounding our treatment of animals. Though this emphasis provides many action-guiding benefits, it also generates a number of complications. The criticism registered here is that Nussbaum unjustifiably restricts what is allowed into our concept of species norms, the most notable restrictions being placed on latent abilities and those that arise as a result of human intervention. These restrictions run the risk of producing inaccurate or misleading recommendations that fail to correspond to the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Three Rs of Animal Research: What They Mean for the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and Why.Howard J. Curzer, Gad Perry, Mark C. Wallace & Dan Perry - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):549-565.
    The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee is entrusted with assessing the ethics of proposed projects prior to approval of animal research. The role of the IACUC is detailed in legislation and binding rules, which are in turn inspired by the Three Rs: the principles of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. However, these principles are poorly defined. Although this provides the IACUC leeway in assessing a proposed project, it also affords little guidance. Our goal is to provide procedural and philosophical clarity (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Virtues and Animals: A Minimally Decent Ethic for Practical Living in a Non-Ideal World.Cheryl Abbate - 2014 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics (6):1-23.
    Traditional approaches to animal ethics commonly emerge from one of two influential ethical theories: Regan’s deontology (The case for animal rights. University of California, Berkeley, 1983) and Singer’s preference utilitarianism (Animal liberation. Avon Books, New York, 1975). I argue that both of the theories are unsuccessful at providing adequate protection for animals because they are unable to satisfy the three conditions of a minimally decent theory of animal protection. While Singer’s theory is overly permissive, Regan’s theory is too restrictive. I (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Response to “Vulnerability, Dependence, and Special Obligations to Domesticated Animals” by Elijah Weber.Clare Palmer - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (4):695-703.
    This paper responds to Elijah Weber’s “Vulnerability, Dependence, and Special Obligations to Domesticated Animals: A Reply to Palmer”. Weber’s paper develops significant objections to the account of special obligations I developed in my book Animal Ethics in Context, in particular concerning our obligations to companion animals. In this book, I made wide-ranging claims about how we may acquire special obligations to animals, including being a beneficiary of an institution that creates vulnerable and dependent animals, and sharing in attitudes that contribute (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Creaturely Solidarity.Grace Y. Kao - 2014 - Journal of Religious Ethics 42 (4):743-768.
    This essay examines several recent contributions to the growing literature on animal ethics from Christian perspectives. I categorize the four books under review in one of three ways depending on the scholars' methodological points of departure: a reconstruction of the place of other animals in Christian history through a selective retrieval of texts and practices; an identification of a key Christian ethical principle; and a reconsideration of foundational doctrines of systematic theology. On the premise that social ethicists are interested in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark