Ethics and the science of animal minds

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):375-394 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Ethicists have commonly appealed to science to bolster their arguments for elevating the moral status of nonhuman animals. I describe a framework within which I take many ethicists to be making such appeals. I focus on an apparent gap in this framework between those properties of animals that are part of the scientific consensus, and those to which ethicists typically appeal in their arguments. I will describe two different ways of diminishing the appearance of the gap, and argue that both of them present challenges to ethicists seeking a firm scientific basis for their claims about the moral status of animals. I argue that more clarity about the role of appeals to science by applied ethicists leads to questions about the effectiveness of such appeals, and that these questions might best be pursued empirically

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
177 (#21,294)

6 months
7 (#1,397,300)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Colin Allen
University of Pittsburgh

Citations of this work

Black Boxes or Unflattering Mirrors? Comparative Bias in the Science of Machine Behaviour.Cameron Buckner - 2023 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 74 (3):681-712.
Fish Cognition and Consciousness.Colin Allen - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (1):25-39.
Animal Minds and Neuroimaging: Bridging the Gap between Science and Ethics?Tom Buller - 2014 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (2):173-181.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations