Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):147-160 (1992)
Abstract |
The creation of transgenic animals by means of modern techniques of genetic manipulation is evaluated in the light of different interpretations of the concept of intrinsic value. The zoocentric interpretation, emphasizing the suffering of individual, sentient animals, is described as an extension of the anthropocentric interpretation. In a biocentric or ecocentric approach the concept of intrinsic value first of all denotes independence of humans and a non-instrumental relation to animals. In the zoocentric approach of Bernard Rollin, genetic engineering is seen as a morally neutral tool, as long as the animal does not suffer as a result of it. Robert Colwell who defends an ecocentric ethic, makes a sharp distinction between wild animals and domesticated animals. Genetic manipulation of wild species is a serious moral issue, in contrast to genetic manipulation of domesticated species which is no problem at all for Colwell. Both authors do not take the species-specific nature (or telos) of domesticated animals seriously. When domestication is seen as a process between the two poles of the wild animal and the human construct (which can be patented), the technique of genetic manipulation can only be seen as a further encroachment upon the intrinsic value of animals. At the level of molecular biology, the concept of an animal's telos loses its meaning.
|
Keywords | Genetic manipulation intrinsic value zoocentric ethics biocentric ethics animal telos |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1007/BF01966357 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
View all 16 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Ethical Discourse on the Use of Genetically Modified Crops: A Review of Academic Publications in the Fields of Ecology and Environmental Ethics. [REVIEW]Daniel Gregorowius, Petra Lindemann-Matthies & Markus Huppenbauer - 2012 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):265-293.
Ethics and the Genetic Engineering of Food Animals.Paul B. Thompson - 1997 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 10 (1):1-23.
A Plea to Implement Robustness Into a Breeding Goal: Poultry as an Example.L. Star, E. D. Ellen, K. Uitdehaag & F. W. A. Brom - 2008 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2):109-125.
‘Ethical Concepts Regarding the Genetic Engineering of Laboratory Animals’: A Confrontation with Moral Beliefs From the Practice of Biomedical Research.R. de Vries - 2006 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (2):211-225.
Science Policy and Moral Purity: The Case of Animal Biotechnology.Paul B. Thompson - 1997 - Agriculture and Human Values 14 (1):11-27.
View all 17 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Wild Animals in Our Backyard. A Contextual Approach to the Intrinsic Value of Animals.Jac A. A. Swart & Jozef Keulartz - 2011 - Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):185-200.
Genetic Engineering and the Integrity of Animals.Rob De Vries - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (5):469-493.
The Wild Animal as a Research Animal.Jac A. A. Swart - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):181-197.
The Moral Considerability of Invasive Transgenic Animals.Benjamin Hale - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (4):337-366.
The Green Kant: Kant's Treatment of Animals.Holly L. Wilson - 2008 - In Paul Pojman Louis Pojman (ed.), in Environmental Ethics: Readings in Theory and Application.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total views
93 ( #127,032 of 2,518,759 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #271,822 of 2,518,759 )
2009-01-28
Total views
93 ( #127,032 of 2,518,759 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #271,822 of 2,518,759 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads