Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Philosophy Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2016

Medicine and Health Sciences

Animal rights

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Philosophy

Aquatic Animals, Cognitive Ethology, And Ethics: Questions About Sentience And Other Troubling Issues That Lurk In Turbid Water, Marc Bekoff Sep 2016

Aquatic Animals, Cognitive Ethology, And Ethics: Questions About Sentience And Other Troubling Issues That Lurk In Turbid Water, Marc Bekoff

Marc Bekoff, Ph.D.

In this general, strongly pro-animal, and somewhat utopian and personal essay, I argue that we owe aquatic animals respect and moral consideration just as we owe respect and moral consideration to all other animal beings, regardless of the taxonomic group to which they belong. In many ways it is more difficult to convince some people of our ethical obligations to numerous aquatic animals because we do not identify or empathize with them as we do with animals with whom we are more familiar or to whom we are more closely related, including those species (usually terrestrial) to whom we refer ...


Definition Of The Concept Of "Humane Treatment" In Relation To Food And Laboratory Animals, Bernard E. Rollin Jun 2016

Definition Of The Concept Of "Humane Treatment" In Relation To Food And Laboratory Animals, Bernard E. Rollin

Bernard Rollin, Ph.D.

The very title of this talk makes a suggestion which must be forestalled, namely the idea that laboratory and food animals enjoy some exceptional moral status by virtue of the fact that we use them. In fact, it is extremely difficult to find any morally relevant grounds for distinguishing between food and laboratory animals and other animals and, far more dramatically, between animals and humans. The same conditions which require that we apply moral categories to humans rationally require that we apply them to animals as well. While it is obviously pragmatically impossible in our current sociocultural setting to expect ...


Abortion And Animal Rights: Does Either Topic Lead To The Other?, Nathan M. Nobis Dec 2015

Abortion And Animal Rights: Does Either Topic Lead To The Other?, Nathan M. Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, Ph.D.

Should people who believe in animal rights think that abortion is wrong? Should pro-lifers accept animal rights? If you think it’s wrong to kill fetuses to end pregnancies, should you also think it’s wrong to kill animals to, say, eat them? If you, say, oppose animal research, should you also oppose abortion?
Some argue ‘yes’ and others argue ‘no’ to either or both sets of questions.The correct answer, however, seems to be, ‘it depends’: it depends on why someone accepts animal rights, and why someone thinks abortion is wrong: it depends on their reasons.

https://whatswrongcvsp.com ...


Review Of Sherry F. Colb And Michael C. Dorf Beating Hearts: Abortion And Animal Rights, Nathan M. Nobis Dec 2015

Review Of Sherry F. Colb And Michael C. Dorf Beating Hearts: Abortion And Animal Rights, Nathan M. Nobis

Nathan M. Nobis, Ph.D.


In this book[1], law professors Sherry F. Colb and Michael C. Dorf argue that:
  1. many non-human animals, at least vertebrates, are morally considerable and prima facie wrong to harm because they are sentient, i.e., conscious and capable of experiencing pains and pleasures;
  2. most aborted human fetuses are not sentient -- their brains and nervous systems are not yet developed enough for sentience -- and so the motivating moral concern for animals doesn't apply to most abortions[2];
  3. later abortions affecting sentient fetuses, while rare, raise serious moral concerns, but these abortions -- like all abortions -- invariably involve the interests and ...