Remove 2004 Remove Humane Remove Morals Remove Protection
article thumbnail

Joel Feinberg (1926-2004) on Animal Rights

Animal Ethics

So far McCloskey is on solid ground, but one can quarrel with his denial that any animals but humans have interests. I should think that the trustee of funds willed to a dog or cat is more than a mere custodian of the animal he protects. The animal itself is the beneficiary of his dutiful services.

2004 40
article thumbnail

Tom Regan on the Animal-Rights Movement

Animal Ethics

But prejudices die hard, all the more so when, as in the present case, they are insulated by widespread secular customs and religious beliefs, sustained by large and powerful economic interests, and protected by the common law. Moral philosophy is no substitute for political action. Might does not make right; might does make law.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Deconstructing Slate's "Pepper" Series

Animal Person

For Engber, who dispassionately describes procedures most of the time, the "advances" in the medical care of humans are all well worth what he and other vivisectionists do to dogs and other sentient nonhumans. By the end of my time as researcher, I was performing behavioral experiments on humans. It "guarantees humane treatment?"

article thumbnail

Tom Regan on Rights

Animal Ethics

The legal rights individuals have arise as the result of the creative activity of human beings. The concept of moral rights differs in important ways from that of legal rights. The concept of moral rights differs in important ways from that of legal rights. First, moral rights, if there are any, are universal.

Rights 40