Abstract
Within this paper, I critique the history of the modification of the broiler chicken through selective breeding and possible future genetic modification. I utilize Margaret Atwood’s fictitious depiction of genetically engineered chickens, from her novel Oryx and Crake, in order to forward the argument that modifications that eliminate animal telos either move beyond the range of current ethical frameworks or can be ethically defended by them. I then utilize the work of feminist epistemologists to argue that understanding what it means to be a chicken shapes our conceptions of what modifications are or are not acceptable. Taking into account justifications stemming from practical knowledge when making ontological claims can help to shift our understanding of what animal modifications can or cannot be justified. The paper ends by addressing three possible problems brought about by accepting such justifications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alcoff, L., & Dalmiya, V. (1993). Are old wives’ tales justified? In E. Potter & L. M. Alcoff (Eds.), Feminist epistemologies (pp. 217–244). New York: Routledge.
Atwood, M. (2004). Oryx and crake. New York: Anchor Books.
Boyd, W. (2001). Making meat: Science, technology, and American poultry production. Technology and Culture, 42(4), 631–664.
Gentle, M. J. (2011). Pain issues in poultry. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905213640?accounti=12598. Accessed 24 Nov 2011. TBP.
Grandin, T. (2005). Animals in translation. New York: Harcourt Books, Inc.
Greger, M. (2010). Trait selection and welfare of genetically engineered animals in agriculture. Journal of Animal Science, 88(2), 811–814.
Greger, M. (2011). Transgenesis in animal agriculture: Addressing animal health and welfare concerns. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 24(5), 451–472.
Lafollette, H., & Shanks, N. (1996). Brute science: Dilemmas of animal experimentation. New York: Routledge.
Nordquist, R. E., Heerkens, J. L. T., Rodenburg, T. B., Boks, S., Ellen, E. D., & Van der Staay, F. J. (2011). Laying hens selected for low mortality: Behaviour in tests of fearfulness, anxiety and cognition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 131(3–4), 110–122.
Prather, R., Shen, M., & Dai, Y. (2008). Genetically modified pigs for medicine and agriculture. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews, 25, 245–266.
Regan, T. (2003). Animal rights, human wrongs. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Rodenburg, T. B., de Haas, E. N., Nielsen, B. L., & Buitenhuis, A. J. (2010). Fearfulness and feather damage in laying hens divergently selected for high and low feather pecking. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 128(1–4), 91–96.
Rollin, B. E. (2003). On telos and genetic engineering. In S. J. Armstrong & R. G. Botzler (Eds.), The animal ethics reader (pp. 342–350). New York: Routledge.
Thompson, P. B. (2008). Animal biotechnology: How not to presume. American Journal of Bioethics, 8(6), 49–50.
Thorp, B. H. (1994). Skeletal disorders in the fowl: A review. Avian Pathology, 23, 203–236.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers of an earlier version of this paper for their helpful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Noll, S. Broiler Chickens and a Critique of the Epistemic Foundations of Animal Modification. J Agric Environ Ethics 26, 273–280 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9362-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9362-y