Animal Sentience 13 (29) (2020)

Authors
Bryce Huebner
Georgetown University
Walter Veit
University of Sydney
Abstract
We welcome Mikhalevich & Powell’s (2020) (M&P) call for a more “‘inclusive”’ animal ethics, but we think their proposed shift toward a moral framework that privileges false positives over false negatives will require radically revising the paradigm assumption in animal research: that there is a clear line to be drawn between sentient beings that are part of our moral community and nonsentient beings that are not.
Keywords animal consciousness  animal sentience  animal ethics  consciousness  biopsychism  mind  philosophy of mind
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

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

Fish and Microchips: On Fish Pain and Multiple Realization.Matthias Michel - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (9):2411-2428.
What Is It Like to Be a Plant?P. Calvo - 2017 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 24 (9-10):205-227.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Measurement Problem of Consciousness.Heather Browning & Walter Veit - 2020 - Philosophical Topics 48 (1):85-108.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Is Cortex Necessary?Sean Allen-Hermanson - 2016 - Animal Sentience 1 (3).
Animal Mind: Science, Philosophy, and Ethics.Bernard E. Rollin - 2007 - The Journal of Ethics 11 (3):253-274.
Sheep Complexity Outside the Laboratory.C. E. Abbate - 2019 - Animal Sentience 233:1-3.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-06-28

Total views
200 ( #53,045 of 2,455,629 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #36,989 of 2,455,629 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes