The Replaceability Argument in the Ethics of Animal Husbandry

Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics (2016)
Authors
Nicolas Delon
New College of Florida
Abstract
Most people agree that inflicting unnecessary suffering upon animals is wrong. Many fewer people, including among ethicists, agree that painlessly killing animals is necessarily wrong. The most commonly cited reason is that death (without pain, fear, distress) is not bad for them in a way that matters morally, or not as significantly as it does for persons, who are self-conscious, make long-term plans and have preferences about their own future. Animals, at least those that are not persons, lack a morally significant interest in continuing to live. At the same time, some argue that existence itself can be good, insofar as one’s life is worth living. For animals, a good life can offset a quick, if early, death. So, it seems to follow that breeding happy animals that will be (prematurely) killed can be a good thing overall. Insofar as slaughter and sale makes it economically sustainable to raise new ones, who would otherwise not exist, raising and killing animals for food who will have lives worth living is good overall. It benefits them as well as consumers, and makes the world better by adding to the sum of happiness. The process of raising and killing animals with positive welfare produces a sequence of replacement that maintains or increases overall welfare, all else being equal (assuming in particular no overall negative impact on the welfare of other parties). Call this the Replaceability Argument (RA) and the ensuing controversy the Replaceability Problem (RP). This is a problem at the crossroads of the ethics of killing, agricultural ethics, procreation ethics, and population ethics.
Keywords killing animals  meat  sustainability  replaceability  farming  death  harm  existence
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

Our Archive
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

What is the Problem of Replaceability?Ricardo Miguel - 2016 - In I. Anna S. Olsson, Sofia M. Araújo & M. Fátima Vieira (eds.), Food futures: ethics, science and culture. Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp. 52-58.
Review of Tatjana Višak, Killing Happy Animals: Explorations in Utilitarian Ethics. [REVIEW]Anna Peterson - 2014 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (3):523-525.
The Case Against Meat.Ben Bramble - forthcoming - In Ben Bramble Bob Fischer (ed.), The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat. Oxford University Press.
A Modest Proposal.Richard Hanley - 2004 - Public Affairs Quarterly 18 (1):1-12.
Killing Animals in Animal Shelters.Clare Alexandra Palmer - 2006 - In The Animal Studies Group (ed.), Killing Animals, edited by The Animal Studies Group. Champaign: Illinois University Press. pp. 170-187.
Vegetarian Meat: Could Technology Save Animals and Satisfy Meat Eaters?Patrick D. Hopkins & Austin Dacey - 2008 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (6):579-596.
Utilitarian Killing, Replacement, and Rights.Evelyn Pluhar - 1990 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 3 (2):147-171.
Replaceability, Career Choice, and Making a Difference.William MacAskill - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (2):269-283.
Animal Agriculture: Symbiosis, Culture, or Ethical Conflict? [REVIEW]Vonne Lund & I. Anna S. Olsson - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):47-56.
When is It Morally Acceptable to Kill Animals?Evelyn B. Pluhar - 1988 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (3):211-224.
You Are What You Eat: Meat, Novel Protein Foods, and Consumptive Freedom. [REVIEW]Volkert Beekman - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (2):185-196.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-01-31

Total downloads
185 ( #29,880 of 2,266,748 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
73 ( #4,569 of 2,266,748 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature