The Doctrine of Double Effect and Killing Animals for Food

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (2):239-253 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Producing food on a large scale without killing any animals seems currently impossible. This poses a challenge for deontological positions that involve a prohibition against killing sentient creatures: it seems that according to these positions omnivorous, vegetarian and vegan diets all rely on food produced in impermissible ways. In order to meet this challenge, deontologists might introduce consequentialist considerations into their theories, for example some principles that effectively require to kill as few animals as possible. This is the kind of strategy Tom Regan has pursued. However, we argue that the challenge for deontological positions on the ethics of food production can also be met by invoking a prominent deontological principle. The doctrine of double effect, with its distinction between bringing about harm intentionally and bringing about harm as a merely foreseen consequence of one’s action, enables us to see a morally significant difference between the various ways to produce food other than the number of animals killed. In this paper we will review some of these ways using Warren S. Quinn’s version of the DDE and show that a more thoroughgoing deontological ethics of food production than Regan’s classic theory is possible. We thereby present a novel way of evaluating modes of food production.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,363

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

On the moral acceptability of killing animals.Hugh Lehman - 1988 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (2):155-162.
Vegetarianism, sentimental or ethical?Jan Deckers - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (6):573-597.
A Reappraisal of the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing.David K. Chan - 2010 - In Joseph Keim Campbell, Michael O'Rourke & Harry S. Silverstein (eds.), Action, Ethics, and Responsibility. MIT Press. pp. 25-45.
When is it morally acceptable to kill animals?Evelyn B. Pluhar - 1988 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (3):211-224.
Killing humans and killing animals.Peter Singer - 1979 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 22 (1-4):145 – 156.
Food fight! Davis versus Regan on the ethics of eating beef.Andy Lamey - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (2):331–348.
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.
The Replaceability Argument in the Ethics of Animal Husbandry.Nicolas Delon - 2016 - Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics.


Added to PP

28 (#418,925)

6 months
3 (#226,335)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1983 - University of California Press, C1983.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan & Mary Midgley - 1986 - The Personalist Forum 2 (1):67-71.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.
Doctrine of double effect.Alison McIntyre - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 11 references / Add more references