Search results for 'Animal rights Philosophy' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  78
    Moral Rights (1987). Animal Liberation or Animal Rights?, Peter Singer. The Monist 70 (1).
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Ge Moore, Defending Animal Rights & Socrates Cafe (2001). ”British Philosophy Past, Present and Future.^ Philosophers'\ I „-4>'Magazine K'. The Philosophers' Magazine 13:5.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Tom Regan (2009). The Case for Animal Rights. In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
    More than twenty years after its original publication, The Case for Animal Rights is an acknowledged classic of moral philosophy, and its author is recognized as the intellectual leader of the animal rights movement. In a new and fully considered preface, Regan responds to his critics and defends the book's revolutionary position.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   277 citations  
  4. Julian H. Franklin (2004). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. Columbia University Press.
    Animals obviously cannot have a right of free speech or a right to vote because they lack the relevant capacities. But their right to life and to be free of exploitation is no less fundamental than the corresponding right of humans, writes Julian H. Franklin. This theoretically rigorous book will reassure the committed, help the uncertain to decide, and arm the polemicist. Franklin examines all the major arguments for animal rights proposed to date and extends the philosophy (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  5.  1
    Niall Shanks (2006). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy; Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism. Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 97:194-195.
    Julian H. Franklin. Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. xix + 151 pp., bibl., index. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. $35 .; Lorraine Daston; Gregg Mitman . Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism. vi + 230 pp., table, notes, index. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. $49.50 (cloth.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Julian H. Franklin (2007). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
    Animals obviously cannot have a right of free speech or a right to vote because they lack the relevant capacities. But their right to life and to be free of exploitation is no less fundamental than the corresponding right of humans, writes Julian H. Franklin. This theoretically rigorous book will reassure the committed, help the uncertain to decide, and arm the polemicist. Franklin examines all the major arguments for animal rights proposed to date and extends the philosophy (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  71
    Mylan Engel (2010). The Philosophy of Animal Rights: A Brief Introduction for Students and Teachers. Lantern Books.
    The book also contains an extensive bibliography of references and philosophical resources.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  11
    Tom Regan (2003). Animal Rights, Human Wrongs: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Regan provides the theoretical framework that grounds a responsible pro-animal rights perspective, and ultimately explores how asking moral questions about other animals can lead to a better understanding of ourselves.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  9. E. Varner Gary (1998). In Nature's Interests?: Interests, Animal Rights, and Environmental Ethics. Oxford University Press.
    This book offers a powerful response to what Varner calls the "two dogmas of environmental ethics"--the assumptions that animal rights philosophies and anthropocentric views are each antithetical to sound environmental policy. Allowing that every living organism has interests which ought, other things being equal, to be protected, Varner contends that some interests take priority over others. He defends both a sentientist principle giving priority to the lives of organisms with conscious desires and an anthropocentric principle giving priority to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   32 citations  
  10.  7
    David Rothenberg (1994). Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology. Environmental Ethics 16 (2):215-218.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Mark Rowlands (2009). Animal Rights: Moral Theory and Practice. Palgrave-Macmillan.
    Animal rights and moral theories -- Arguing for one's species -- Utilitarianism and animals : Peter Singer's case for animal liberation -- Tom Regan : animal rights as natural rights -- Virtue ethics and animals -- Contractarianism and animal rights -- Animal minds.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  12. Michael E. Zimmerman (2004). Environmental Philosophy From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  13. Michael Allen Fox (2005). Julian H. Franklin, Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 25 (6):408-412.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  9
    Mahfouz Azzam (2006). Islamic Philosophy on Animal Rights. In Jacky Turner & Joyce D'Silva (eds.), Animals, Ethics, and Trade: The Challenge of Animal Sentience. Earthscan. pp. 129.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. M. A. Fox (2005). Julian H. Franklin, Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. Philosophy in Review 25 (6):408.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Mark Rowlands (1998). Animal Rights: A Philosophical Defence. St. Martin's Press.
    The question of the nature and extent of our moral obligations to non-human animals has featured prominently in recent moral debate. This book defends the novel position that a contradictarian moral theory can be used to justify the claim that animals possess a substantial and wide-ranging set of moral rights. Critiquing the rival accounts of Peter Singer and Tom Regan, this study shows how an influential form of the social contract idea can be extended to make sense of the (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  17. Frank Palmeri (2006). Deconstructing the Animal-Human Binary: Recent Work in Animal Studies: Review of Elephant Slaves and Pampered Parrots: Exotic Animals in Eighteenth-Century Paris by Louise E. Robbins, Experimenting with Humans and Animals: From Galen to Animal Rights by Anita Guerrini, Figuring Animals: Essays on Animal Images in Art, Literature, Philosophy, and Popular Culture, Edited by Mary Sanders Pollock and Catherine Rainwater, Renaissance Beasts: Of Animals, Humans, and Other Wonderful Creatures, Edited by Erica Fudge, Romanticism and Animal Rights by David Perkins, Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo by Nigel Rothfels, and Zoontologies: The Question of the Animal, Edited by Cary Wolfe. [REVIEW] Clio 36:407-420.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  18
    Stephen R. L. Clark (1987). Animal Rights Daniel A. Dombrowski: The Philosophy of Vegetarianism. Pp. Iv+188. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984. $20.00 (Paper, 9.95). [REVIEW] The Classical Review 37 (02):224-225.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  22
    John Hadley (2007). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy - by Julian H. Franklin. Philosophical Books 48 (2):187-188.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  1
    Niall Shanks (2006). Julian H. Franklin.Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. Xix + 151 Pp., Bibl., Index. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. $35 .Lorraine Daston; Gregg Mitman .Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism. Vi + 230 Pp., Table, Notes, Index. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. $49.50. [REVIEW] Isis 97 (1):194-195.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  56
    Elisa Aaltola (2012). Animal Suffering: Philosophy and Culture. Palgrave-Macmillan.
    Animal Suffering: Philosophy and Culture explores the multifaceted moral meanings allocated to non-human suffering in contemporary Western culture.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  62
    Aaron Garrett, Richard Dean, Humphrey Primatt, John Oswald & Thomas Young (eds.) (1713). Animal Rights and Souls in the Eighteenth Century. Thoemmes Press.
    The publication of 'Animal Rights and Souls in the 18th Century' will be welcomed by everyone interested in the development of the modern animal liberation movement, as well as by those who simply want to savour the work of enlightenment thinkers pushing back the boundaries of both science and ethics. At last these long out-of-print texts are again available to be read and enjoyed - and what texts they are! Gems like Bougeant's witty reductio of the Christian (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  23. Stephen St C. Bostock (1993). Zoos and Animal Rights: The Ethics of Keeping Animals. Routledge.
    Zoos and animal rights seem utterly opposed to each other. In this controversial and timely book, Stephen Bostock argues that they can develop a more harmonious relationship. He examines the diverse ethical and technical issues involved, including human cruelty, human domination over animals, the well-being of wild animals outside their natural habitat, and the nature of wild and domestic animals. In his analysis, Bostock draws attention to the areas which give rise to misconceptions. This book explores the long (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  42
    Roger Scruton (2000). Animal Rights and Wrongs. Metro in Association with Demos.
    This paperback edition is fully updated with new chapters on the livestoick crisis, fishing and BSE and a layman's guide introduction to philosophical concepts, ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  25. Uriah Kriegel (2013). Animal Rights: A Non‐Consequentialist Approach. In K. Petrus & M. Wild (eds.), Animal Minds and Animal Ethics. Transcript.
    It is a curious fact about mainstream discussions of animal rights that they are dominated by consequentialist defenses thereof, when consequentialism in general has been on the wane in other areas of moral philosophy. In this paper, I describe an alternative, non‐consequentialist ethical framework and argue that it grants animals more expansive rights than consequentialist proponents of animal rights typically grant. The cornerstone of this non‐consequentialist framework is the thought that the virtuous agent is (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  10
    Elisa Aaltola (2009). Philosophy and Animal Studies: Calarco, Castricano, and Diamond. Society and Animals 17 (3):279-286.
    Recently, animal studies has started to gain popularity. This interdisciplinary field investigates the human- animal relationship from different perspectives, including philosophy, cultural studies, and biology. In 2008, at least three books explored themes related to animal studies : Matthew Calarco, Zoographies: The Question of the Animal ; Jodey Castricano, Animal Subjects: An Ethics Reader in a Posthuman World; and Cora Diamond, Cary Wolfe, et al. Philosophy and Animal Life. Each volume approaches (...) studies from a different viewpoint, but they also share many themes. This review paper discusses the differences and similarities between the volumes and highlights the directions in which animal studies is developing. It is argued that an emphasis on "direct" perception or experience of animality and heterogeneity, and an exploration of otherness, are elements that all these books share, and that are relevant to animal studies. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  56
    Paola Cavalieri (2001). The Animal Question: Why Nonhuman Animals Deserve Human Rights. Oxford University Press.
    How much do animals matter--morally? Can we keep considering them as second class beings, to be used merely for our benefit? Or, should we offer them some form of moral egalitarianism? Inserting itself into the passionate debate over animal rights, this fascinating, provocative work by renowned scholar Paola Cavalieri advances a radical proposal: that we extend basic human rights to the nonhuman animals we currently treat as "things." Cavalieri first goes back in time, tracing the roots of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  28. John Hadley (2005). Nonhuman Animal Property: Reconciling Environmentalism and Animal Rights. Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (3):305–315.
    In this paper I extend liberal property rights theory to nonhuman animals.I sketch an outline of a nonhuman animal property rights regime and argue that both proponents of animal rights and ecological holism ought to accept nonhuman animal property rights. To conclude I address a series of objections.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. John Hadley (2009). Animal Rights Extremism and the Terrorism Question. Journal of Social Philosophy 40 (3):363-378.
    In this paper I extend orthodox just-war terrorism theory to the phenomenon of extremist violence on behalf of nonhuman animals.I argue that most documented cases of so-called animal rights extremism do not quality as terrorism.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  10
    Courtney Lynd Daigle (2014). Incorporating the Philosophy of Technology Into Animal Welfare Assessment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4):633-647.
    Changes in attitudes towards how animals are housed in agriculture are currently under question in the public eye—particularly for laying hens. Many arguments from the rights and utilitarian viewpoints have been made for changing environmental conditions and managerial practices for animals in an effort to respect the interests of the animal and better their welfare. Yet, these arguments have been based upon belief systems that were developed from information that can be collected by human perception only. Technological advancements (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  66
    Azam Golam (2009). Justification of Animal Rights Claim. Philosophy and Progress 43 (2):139-152.
    The objective of the paper is to justify the claim for animals‟ rights. For years, it is one of the most debated questions in the field of applied ethics whether animals‟ have rights or not. There are a number of philosophers who hold that animals are neither moral agent nor rational being and hence animals have no rights because the concept of rights is applicable only to the rational beings. On the other hand the proponents of (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  23
    Vonne Lund, Sven Hemlin & James White (2004). Natural Behavior, Animal Rights, or Making Money – a Study of Swedish Organic Farmers' View of Animal Issues. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):157-179.
    A questionnaire study was performed among Swedish organic livestock farmers to determine their view of animal welfare and other ethical issues in animal production. The questionnaire was sent to 56.5% of the target group and the response rate was 75.6%. A principal components analysis (exploratory factor analysis) was performed to get a more manageable data set. A matrix of intercorrelations between all pairs of factors was computed. The factors were then entered into a series of multiple regression models (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  33. Gary L. Francione & Robert Garner (2010). The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation? Columbia University Press.
    Gary L. Francione is a law professor and leading philosopher of animal rights theory. Robert Garner is a political theorist specializing in the philosophy and politics of animal protection. Francione maintains that we have no moral justification for using nonhumans and argues that because animals are property—or economic commodities—laws or industry practices requiring "humane" treatment will, as a general matter, fail to provide any meaningful level of protection. Garner favors a version of animal rights (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  34. John Hadley & Elisa Aaltola (eds.) (2014). Animal Ethics and Philosophy: Questioning the Orthodoxy. Rowman and Littlefield International.
    Bringing together new theory and critical perspectives on a broad range of topics in animal ethics, this book examines the implications of recent developments in the various fields that bear upon animal ethics. Showcasing a new generation of thinkers, it exposes some important shortcomings in existing animal rights theory.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  4
    Robert Garner (forthcoming). Animal Rights and the Deliberative Turn in Democratic Theory. European Journal of Political Theory:1474885116630937.
    Deliberative democracy has been castigated by those who regard it as exclusive and elitist because of its failure to take into account a range of structural inequalities existing within contemporary liberal democracies. As a result, it is suggested, deliberative arenas will merely reproduce these inequalities, advantaging the already powerful extolling mainstream worldviews excluding the interests of the less powerful and those expounding alternative worldviews. Moreover, the tactics employed by those excluded social movements seeking to right an injustice are typically those (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  61
    L. Galvin Shelley & A. HerzogHarold (1992). Ethical Ideology, Animal Rights Activism, and Attitudes Toward the Treatment of Animals. Ethics and Behavior 2 (3):141-149.
    In two studies, we used the Ethics Position Questionnaire (EPQ) to investigate the relationship between individual differences in moral philosophy, involvement in the animal rights movement, and attitudes toward the treatment of animals. In the first, 600 animal rights activists attending a national demonstration and 266 nonactivist college students were given the EPQ. Analysis of the returns from 157 activists and 198 students indicated that the activists were more likely than the students to hold an (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  37. Stanley Cavell, Cora Diamond, John McDowell, Ian Hacking & Cary Wolfe (2008). Philosophy and Animal Life. Columbia University Press.
    _Philosophy and Animal Life_ offers a new way of thinking about animal rights, our obligation to animals, and the nature of philosophy itself. Cora Diamond begins with "The Difficulty of Reality and the Difficulty of Philosophy," in which she accuses analytical philosophy of evading, or deflecting, the responsibility of human beings toward nonhuman animals. Diamond then explores the animal question as it is bound up with the more general problem of philosophical skepticism. Focusing (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  38. Ralph R. Acampora (2014). Corporal Compassion: Animal Ethics and Philosophy of Body. University of Pittsburgh Press.
    Most approaches to animal ethics ground the moral standing of nonhumans in some appeal to their capacities for intelligent autonomy or mental sentience. _Corporal Compassion _emphasizes the phenomenal and somatic commonality of living beings; a philosophy of body that seeks to displace any notion of anthropomorphic empathy in viewing the moral experiences of nonhuman living beings. Ralph R. Acampora employs phenomenology, hermeneutics, existentialism and deconstruction to connect and contest analytic treatments of animal rights and liberation theory. (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  39.  25
    Carl Cohen & Tom Regan (2001). The Animal Rights Debate. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Here, for the first time, the world's two leading authorities—Tom Regan, who argues for animal rights, and Carl Cohen, who argues against them—make their respective case before the public at large. The very terms of the debate will never be the same. This seminal moment in the history of the controversy over animal rights will influence the direction of this debate throughout the rest of the century.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  40.  45
    Angus Taylor (1996). Animal Rights and Human Needs. Environmental Ethics 18 (3):249-264.
    The idea that animal rights can be married to environmental ethics is still a minority opinion. The land ethic of Aldo Leopold, as interpreted by J. Baird Callicott, remains fundamentally at odds with the ascription of substantial rights to (nonhuman) animals. Similarly, Laura Westra’s notion of “respectful hostility,” which attempts to reconcile a holistic environmental ethic with “respect” for animals, has no place for animal rights.In this paper, I argue that only by ascribing rights (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  41.  28
    Karl Schudt (2003). Are Animal Rights Inimical to Human Dignity? Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:189-203.
    Do animals possess rights? The argument works from marginal cases: we attribute value to humans because of some minimal set of characteristics thathumans possess. Animals possess these characteristics; therefore they deserve moral consideration. Such arguments depend on a functionalist attribution of value. Any turn to functionalism will necessarily be detrimental to human dignity, since some humans will not qualify. I will show how the methods used to establish animal rights are generally some form of functionalism, with particular (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Mark Rowlands (1997). Contractarianism and Animal Rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (3):235–247.
    It is widely accepted, by both friends and foes of animal rights, that contractarianism is the moral theory least likely to justify the assigning of direct moral status to non-human animals. These are not, it is generally supposed, rational agents, and contractarian approaches can grant direct moral status only to such agents. I shall argue that this widely accepted view is false. At least some forms of contractarianism, when properly understood, do, in fact, entail that non-human animals possess (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  43. Ralph R. Acampora (2006). Corporal Compassion: Animal Ethics and Philosophy of Body. University of Pittsburgh Press.
    Most approaches to animal ethics ground the moral standing of nonhumans in some appeal to their capacities for intelligent autonomy or mental sentience. _Corporal Compassion _emphasizes the phenomenal and somatic commonality of living beings; a philosophy of body that seeks to displace any notion of anthropomorphic empathy in viewing the moral experiences of nonhuman living beings. Ralph R. Acampora employs phenomenology, hermeneutics, existentialism and deconstruction to connect and contest analytic treatments of animal rights and liberation theory. (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Stanley Cavell, Cora Diamond, John McDowell, Ian Hacking & Cary Wolfe (2009). Philosophy and Animal Life. Cambridge University Press.
    _Philosophy and Animal Life_ offers a new way of thinking about animal rights, our obligation to animals, and the nature of philosophy itself. Cora Diamond begins with "The Difficulty of Reality and the Difficulty of Philosophy," in which she accuses analytical philosophy of evading, or deflecting, the responsibility of human beings toward nonhuman animals. Diamond then explores the animal question as it is bound up with the more general problem of philosophical skepticism. Focusing (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  93
    Nathan Nobis (2004). Carl Cohen's 'Kind' Arguments for Animal Rights and Against Human Rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (1):43–59.
    Carl Cohen's arguments against animal rights are shown to be unsound. His strategy entails that animals have rights, that humans do not, the negations of those conclusions, and other false and inconsistent implications. His main premise seems to imply that one can fail all tests and assignments in a class and yet easily pass if one's peers are passing and that one can become a convicted criminal merely by setting foot in a prison. However, since his moral (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  46.  37
    Eric Moore (2002). The Unequal Case for Animal Rights. Environmental Ethics 24 (3):295-312.
    I argue that the equal rights views of Tom Regan and Evelyn B. Pluhar must be rejected because they have unacceptable consequences. My objection is similar to one made in the literature by Mary Anne Warren, but I develop it in more detail and defend it from several plausible responses that an equal rights theorist might make. I formulate a theory, a moderate form of perfectionism, that makes a valuedistinction between moral agents and moral patients according to which (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47. Tongdong Bai (2009). The Price of Serving Meat—on Confucius's and Mencius's Views of Human and Animal Rights. Asian Philosophy 19 (1):85 – 99.
    The apparent conflict between some fundamental ideas of Confucianism and of rights seems to render Confucianism incompatible with rights. I will illustrate the general strategies, based upon an insight of the later Rawls, to solve the incompatibility problem. I will then show how these strategies can help us to develop a Confucian account of animal rights, which, by way of example, demonstrates how Confucianism can endorse and develop unique and constructive accounts of most rights that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  6
    Chris Tucker & Chris MacDonald (2004). Beastly Contractarianism? A Contractarian Analysis of the Possibility of Animal Rights. Essays in Philosophy 5 (2):31.
    Social Contract theorists and animal advocates seem to have agreed to go their separate ways. Contractarians have avoided attempting to address an issue that seems destined to prove embarrassing for the theory given the current political climate. It is largely thought that contractarianism affirms the meager moral standing commonly attributed to most animals. In the face of this consensus, animal advocates who feel the need to philosophically ground the moral status of animals have turned to other potential sources. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49.  42
    L. W. Sumner (1988). Animal Welfare and Animal Rights. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):159-175.
    Animal liberationists tend to divide into two mutually antagonistic camps: animal welfarists, who share a utilitarian moral outlook, and animal rightists, who presuppose a structure of basic rights. However, the gap between these groups tends to be exaggerated by their allegiance to oversimplified versions of their favored moral frameworks. For their part, animal rightists should acknowledge that rights, however basic, are also defeasible by appeals to consequences. Contrariwise, animal welfarists should recognize that (...), however derivative, are capable of constraining appeals to consequences. If both sides move to more defensible theoretical positions, their remaining differences on that level may be compatible with a broad area of convergence on practical issues. Keywords: animal welfare, animal rights, ethics CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  18
    David E. W. Fenner (1998). Animal Rights and the Problem of Proximity. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):51-61.
    This paper argues that due to considerations of proximity of particular humans to particular (nonhuman) animals, and to the impact this proximity has on the obligations felt by those humans to those animals, an animal rights strategy as a means of specifying what obligations humans really do have toward animals cannot be successful. The good news, however; is that it is out of these proximity relations that we can begin to understand just what obligations humans properly do have (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000