Remove 2005 Remove Animal Ethics Remove Humane Remove Morals
article thumbnail

Bernard E. Rollin on Animals as Ends

Animal Ethics

Surely any sentient or conscious being has states that matter to it in a positive or negative way—pleasure matters to an animal in a positive way, pain or fear in a negative way. Given the logic of morality, we should extend our moral attention to those states that matter to it when our actions affect that being.

Morals 40
article thumbnail

Julian H. Franklin on the Use of Animals in Research

Animal Ethics

To inflict death or pain on animals for scientific or medical research is wrong morally, and ought to be prohibited. This follows from everything said in the text about the rights of animals. This does not mean that animals may never be deliberately harmed or become subjects of research. Animals cannot give consent.

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

Julian H. Franklin on Animals and Plants

Animal Ethics

Animals as well as humans can suffer pain, deprivation, and unwanted death. An exception for vegetables is thus consistent with the categorical imperative; an exception for humans with respect to eating animals is not. Vegetables cannot.

article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

billion a year between 1997 and 2005, totaling nearly $35 billion, according to researchers at the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University. It’s time that our tax dollars no longer finance the inhumane conditions—for workers and animals and the climate—of factory farms. We know that animals suffer as well.