Remove Animal Ethics Remove Animal Rights Remove Morals Remove Research
article thumbnail

H. J. McCloskey on Animal Rights

Animal Ethics

If an animal has the relevant moral capacities, actually or potentially, then it can be a possessor of rights. The evidence available to date about the rational capacities of animals is far from complete, but to date it appears to be decidedly unfavourable to the view that any animals possess the relevant moral capacities.

article thumbnail

R. G. Frey on Animal Rights

Animal Ethics

The question of whether animals possess rights is once again topical, largely as a result of the recent surge of interest in animal welfare and in the moral pros and cons of eating animals and using them in scientific research. Arguments to show that animals do have rights, therefore, are at a premium. (

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 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.

article thumbnail

From the Mailbag

Animal Ethics

The volume „Tierrechte – eine interdisziplinäre Herausforderung“ (literally „Animal Rights – an interdisciplinary challenge“ has just been released from Harald Fischer Verlag (publisher), Germany. The results of the lectures are written down in this book. More information on the book can be found here. We really appreciate it!

Germany 40
article thumbnail

Meat, Cancer, and the Cumulative Case for Ethical Vegetarianism

Animal Ethics

Ethical vegetarianism is the thesis that killing and eating animals is morally wrong whenever equally nutritious plant-based alternatives are available. The case for ethical vegetarianism starts with several uncontroversial premises. It is not just a few outspoken animal rights fanatics who hold this view.

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.

article thumbnail

Moral Vegetarianism, Part 3 of 13

Animal Ethics

For an explanation of this feature, click on “Moral Vegetarianism” at the bottom of this post. Most moral vegetarians list fish and fowl as animals one should not eat. The ability to feel pain is not an obviously plausible way of morally distinguishing microorganisms from other organisms. What Meat Should Not Be Eaten?

Morals 40