Authors
Sanjit Chakraborty
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Kolkata
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 to all rational beings, but I think there is no significant proclamation from their side that openly talks in favour of animal’s 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 same tissues and like a human, animals also have the same way of perception, reasoning and appetites. My next effort would be to decipher how Porphyry illustrates Theophrastus’ perspective not in the way (the technical theory of justice) the Stoics argued. Porphyry’s stance seems more humanistic that looks for the pertinent reasons for treating animal rights from the contention of justice that Aristotle in his early writings defied since the animals can deal with reasons. The paper highlights on how much we could justificatorily demand the empathetic concern for animals from the outlook of the mentioned Greek thinkers and the modern animal rights thinkers as quasi-right of animals, even if my own position undertakes the empathetic ground for animals as an undeserving humanitarian way.
Keywords Animal rights  Porphyry  Anti-speciesist argument  One-of-us-ness  Singer
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

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - Cambridge University Press.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan & Mary Midgley - 1986 - The Personalist Forum 2 (1):67-71.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1983 - University of California Press, C1983.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.

View all 18 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.
Reply to Fulda on Animal Rights.Michael Levin - 1993 - Journal of Value Inquiry 27 (1):111-112.
The Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare Are Rights.Clare McCausland - 2014 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4):649-662.
Popular Media and Animals.Claire Molloy - 2011 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Animal Rights: Autonomy and Redundancy. [REVIEW]David Sztybel - 2001 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (3):259-273.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-09-20

Total views
951 ( #4,073 of 2,348,975 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
32 ( #21,982 of 2,348,975 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes