Synthese 198 (2):1011-1027 (2019)

François Jaquet
Université de Strasbourg
Many people believe that human interests matter much more than the like interests of non-human animals, and this “speciesist belief” plays a crucial role in the philosophical debate over the moral status of animals. In this paper, I develop a debunking argument against it. My contention is that this belief is unjustified because it is largely due to an off-track process: our attempt to reduce the cognitive dissonance generated by the “meat paradox”. Most meat-eaters believe that it is wrong to harm animals unnecessarily, yet they routinely and deliberately behave in ways that cause great unnecessary suffering to animals. As recent research suggests, this practical inconsistency puts them in an unpleasant state of dissonance, which they try to escape by resolving the paradox. And they do so in part by adopting the speciesist belief—if animal suffering matters much less than human suffering, then harming animals cannot be so wrong after all. Since this belief-forming process does not track moral truth, I conclude that we are not justified in believing that human interests matter more than the similar interests of non-humans.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-019-02080-5
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: 63,133
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

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
Ethical Intuitionism.Michael Huemer - 2005 - Palgrave Macmillan.
Evolutionary Debunking Arguments.Guy Kahane - 2011 - Noûs 45 (1):103-125.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Debunking Arguments.Daniel Z. Korman - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (12).
Why Do We Believe Humans Matter More Than Other Animals?Scott Hill & Michael Bertrand - 2020 - Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research:1 - 8.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hume and Our Treatment of Animals.Monica L. Gerrek - 2004 - Essays in Philosophy 5 (2):13.
Analysing Animality: A Critical Approach.Jason Wyckoff - 2015 - Philosophical Quarterly 65 (260):529-546.
Speciesism and Moral Status.Peter Singer - 2009 - Metaphilosophy 40 (3-4):567-581.
Harm in the Wild: Facing Non-Human Suffering in Nature. [REVIEW]Beril İdemen Sözmen - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1075-1088.
Process Debunking and Ethics.Shaun Nichols - 2014 - Ethics 124 (4):727-749.
What is Speciesism?Oscar Horta - 2010 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (3):243-266.
The Relevance of Speciesism to Life Sciences Practices.Roger Wertheimer - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):27-38.
Why Speciesism is Wrong: A Response to Kagan.Peter Singer - 2016 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (1):31-35.
Veganism Versus Meat-Eating, and the Myth of “Root Capacity”: A Response to Hsiao.László Erdős - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (6):1139-1144.
A Modest Proposal.Richard Hanley - 2004 - Public Affairs Quarterly 18 (1):1-12.


Added to PP index

Total views
78 ( #137,286 of 2,448,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #98,580 of 2,448,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes