Authors
Gary Comstock
North Carolina State University
Abstract
Guardians of companion animals killed wrongfully in the U.S. historically receive compensatory judgments reflecting the animal’s economic value. As animals are property in torts law, this value typically is the animal’s fair market value—which is often zero. But this is only the animal’s value, as it were, to a stranger and, in light of the fact that many guardians value their animals at rates far in excess of fair market value, legislatures and courts have begun to recognize a second value, the animal’s value to her guardian. What is this noneconomic value, and how should guardians be compensated for it? In Part 1, I propose a novel method to answer this question. My method includes a third, even more controversial, value: the animal’s value to herself. The idea that an animal could invest in herself faces many criticisms. In Part 2, I defend the claim by examining the mental capacities of dogs (Canis familiaris). I rebut the central objection—that dogs lack the psychological capacities required for self-investment—by showing that dogs are autonomous, think about their futures, and inhibit their desires in light of their goals. I close by suggesting that whereas the approach has conservative implications for the valuation of companion animals, it has radical implications for the valuation of agricultural animals. Keywords: companion animals, animal law, legal theory, value theory, practical ethics, economic value, noneconomic value, intrinsic value, instrumental value, animal welfare, dogs, animal rights, capital value, self-investment value, autonomy, wrongful death, philosophy of animal law, animal minds, moral standing of animals, legal standing of animals, agency, prospection, canine neurobiology, bereavement, replaceability, non-ideal ethics
Keywords animal law  animal rights  animal cognition  comparative neuroscience  utilitarian approaches to animal value  law and economics  companion animal value  noneconomic value  companion animals  animal rights  capital value
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Raising the Bar in the Justification of Animal Research. Galgut - 2015 - Journal of Animal Ethics 5 (1):5-19,.
Nonhuman Animal Property: Reconciling Environmentalism and Animal Rights.John Hadley - 2005 - Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (3):305–315.
Popular Media and Animals.Claire Molloy - 2011 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Duties to Companion Animals.Steve Cooke - 2011 - Res Publica 17 (3):261-274.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-05-13

Total views
142 ( #64,167 of 2,348,299 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #26,096 of 2,348,299 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes