The Chicken Fallacy and the Ethics of Cruelty to Non-Human Animals

Abstract
The ideological underpinning that guides our interaction with non-human animals needs revision. The traditional outlook, according to which humans have a higher moral status vis-à-vis non-human animals, is now otiose. If these claims are to be justified, what ideological framework would serve this end? What are the moral implications of endorsing the view that humans possess no higher moral status than non-human animals? This work takes as foundation Charles Darwins theory of evolution, which affirms that humans emerged from the long chain of evolutionary history, where non-human animals have been the carriers of the genes that shaped humans. A revisit to the discourse on the moral implication of humans cruelty to their ancestors and neighbours becomes pertinent. This essay goes against the mainstream and dominant perspective that non-human animals exist to serve human ends and as such can be treated with disdain. The thesis of this paper goes beyond Peter Singers submission that sentience is the basis for conferring moral worth on non-human animals. It affirms that in addition to sentience, good neighbourliness is a factor in determining the moral worth of non-human animals. It submits that cruelty to reared and domesticated animals may produce violent and wild species of these animals kind in a future evolution, thereby endangering the lives of future human generation, through negative alteration of genes. In the end, this paper proposes the principle of biological altruism as a suitable norm for determining the moral worth of non-human animals.
Keywords Chicken fallacy, Moral worth of Non-Human Animals, Darwinism, Cruelty to Animals, Domestic animals
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.3329/bioethics.v8i1.31079
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
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Speciesism and Moral Status.Peter Singer - 2009 - Metaphilosophy 40 (3-4):567-581.
Moral Agency in Other Animals.Paul Shapiro - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):357-373.
Animal Rights, Human Wrongs.Tom Regan - 1980 - Environmental Ethics 2 (2):99-120.
Animal Rights, Human Wrongs.Tom Regan - 1980 - Environmental Ethics 2 (2):99-120.
Duties Regarding Animals.Patrick Kain - 2010 - In Lara Denis (ed.), Kant's Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press. pp. 210--233.
Duties to Companion Animals.Steve Cooke - 2011 - Res Publica 17 (3):261-274.
Agency and Moral Status.Jeff Sebo - 2017 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (1):1-22.
On Justifying the Exploitation of Animals in Research.S. F. Sapontzis - 1988 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):177-196.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-01-23

Total downloads
2 ( #906,680 of 2,268,152 )

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

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes

Sign in to use this feature