The anthropocentric paradigm and the posibility of animal ethics

Ethics and the Environment 15 (1):pp. 27-50 (2010)
Authors
Abstract
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, recently a new type of criticism has become more prominent. The claim is that the pro-animal arguments ignore the relevance of established paradigms and meanings. The moral status of animals is ..
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.2979/ETE.2010.15.1.27
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 34,515
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Liberty and Valuing Sentient Life. Hadley - 2013 - Ethics and the Environment 18 (1):87-103.
Biophilia and Emotive Ethics: Derrida, Alice, and Animals. Bump - 2014 - Ethics and the Environment 19 (2):57.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-05-26

Total downloads
199 ( #26,605 of 2,268,152 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #211,649 of 2,268,152 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature