Abstract
Animals, the beautiful creatures of God in the Stoic and especially in Porphyry’s sense, need to be treated as rational. We know that the Stoics ask for justice for all rational beings, but I think there is no significant proclamation from their side that directly talks in favour of animal justice. They claim the rationality of animals but do not confer any right to human beings. The later Neo-Platonist philosopher Porphyry magnificently deciphers this idea in his writing On Abstinence from Animal Food. Aristotle’s successor Theophrastus thinks that both animals and humans are made up of the same tissues, and like humans, animals have the same perception, reasoning, and appetites. In this paper, I will attempt to show another empathetic ground that considers rational animals as friends or reincarnated relatives of human beings, as Aristotle, Pythagoras, and Theophrastus occasionally put forth in their writings. My next effort would be to decipher how Porphyry illustrates Theophratus’ perspective, not in the way (the technical theory of justice) the Stoics argued. Porphyry’s stance seems more humanistic, looking for the pertinent reasons for treating animal rights from the contention of justice that Aristotle defied since the animals can deal with reasons in his early writings. The paper highlights how much we could make justificatory demand the empathetic concern for animals from the outlook of the mentioned Greek thinkers and modern animal rights thinkers as quasi-right animals, even if my own position undertakes the empathetic ground for animals as an undeserving humanitarian way.
Keywords Animal rights  Porphyry  Singer  anti-speciesist argument  one-of-us-ness
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,464
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

Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - Cambridge University Press.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1983 - University of California Press, C1983.
Politics.David Aristotle & Keyt - 1998 - Hackett Publishing Company.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - Philosophy 56 (216):267-268.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Justification of Animal Rights Claim.Azam Golam - 2009 - Philosophy and Progress 43 (2):139-152.
Porphyry, Nature, and Community.Owen Goldin - 2001 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 18 (4):353 - 371.
Animals and Sociology.Kay Peggs - 2012 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness.Kelly Oliver - 2010 - Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
Moral Rights and Animals.H. J. McCloskey - 1979 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 22 (1-4):23 – 54.
Popular Media and Animals.Claire Molloy - 2011 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Reply to Fulda on Animal Rights.Michael Levin - 1993 - Journal of Value Inquiry 27 (1):111-112.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-06-18

Total views
18 ( #611,365 of 2,520,787 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,623 of 2,520,787 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes