Animal Sentience 233:1-3 (2019)

Cheryl (C.E.) Abbate
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Marino & Merskin’s review shows that sheep are intelligent and highly social but their methodology has some shortcomings. I describe five problems with reviewing only the academic and scientific literature and suggest how one might provide an even more compelling case for the complexity of sheep minds.
Keywords animal ethics  animal cognition  animal research
Categories (categorize this paper)
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

Mom, Dad, Clone: Implications for Reproductive Privacy.Lori B. Andrews - 1998 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (2):176-186.
Mulesing and Animal Ethics.Joanne Sneddon & Bernard Rollin - 2010 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (4):371-386.
Ethical Issues Associated with Sheep Fly Strike Research, Prevention, and Control.Michael C. Morris - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):205-217.
Inside the Beltway Again: A Sheep of a Different Feather.Alexander Morgan Capron - 1997 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 7 (2):171-179.


Added to PP index

Total views
25 ( #396,926 of 2,344,116 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #27,174 of 2,344,116 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes