The Problem of the Question About Animal Ethics: Discussion with Mark Coeckelbergh and David Gunkel

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (4):705-715 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article I discuss the thesis put forward by David Gunkel and Mark Coeckelbergh in their essay Facing Animals:A Relational, Other-Oriented Approach to Moral Standing. The authors believe that the question about the status of animals needs to be reconsidered. In their opinion, traditional attempts to justify the practice of ascribing rights to animals have been based on the search for what is common to animals and people. This popular conviction rests on the intuition according to which we tend to treat better those beings that are closer to us and resemble man in one way or the other. The attempts to ascribe a special status to animals are therefore based on the question “What properties does the animal have?”. However, the question is not well formulated because it leads to a number of ontological and epistemological problems. The question should rather be “What are the conditions under which an entity becomes a moral subject?”. Whilst fully subscribing to the suggestion, I cannot agree to the way the question is understood by both authors. I will demonstrate that the question opens up a transcendental dimension of reflections and may provide a clear justification of the need to engage in animal ethics. To do so, I will separate the easy and hard problems of animal ethics and use a different approach from the one suggested by Gunkel and Coeckelbergh to demonstrate how the need to pursue animal ethics may be justified.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Facing Animals: A Relational, Other-Oriented Approach to Moral Standing.Mark Coeckelbergh & David J. Gunkel - 2014 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (5):715-733.
The Moral Rights of Animals.Mylan Engel & Gary Comstock (eds.) - 2016 - Lanham, MD: Lexington.
Animal Ethics.Robert Garner - 2005 - Malden, MA: Polity.
The Ethics of Killing “Surplus” Zoo Animals.Crystal Allen Gunasekera - 2018 - Journal of Animal Ethics 8 (1):93-102.
Virtue Ethics and Animal Moral Status.Rebecca L. Walker - 2023 - Res Philosophica 100 (4):473-495.
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.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-07-06

Downloads
30 (#132,620)

6 months
6 (#1,472,471)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

The other question: can and should robots have rights?David J. Gunkel - 2018 - Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2):87-99.
Problemy z moralnością zwierząt.Andrzej Waleszczyński - 2020 - Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal 10 (1):151-172.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.Jeremy Bentham - 1780 - New York: Dover Publications. Edited by J. H. Burns & H. L. A. Hart.
Totality and infinity.Emmanuel Levinas - 1961/1969 - Pittsburgh,: Duquesne University Press.

View all 27 references / Add more references