Remove Animal Remove Animal Ethics Remove Bears Remove Rights
article thumbnail

H. J. McCloskey on Animal Rights

Animal Ethics

The issue as to who or what may be a possessor of rights is not simply a matter of academic, conceptual interest. If, for instance, it is determined that gravely mentally defective human beings and monsters born of human parents are not the kinds of beings who may possess rights, this bears on how we may treat them.

article thumbnail

Empty Cages

Animal Ethics

Here is a website that contains much useful information about animal ethics. I'm not sure what relation it bears to Tom Regan, the philosopher from North Carolina State University. It appears to be organized around Regan's book Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights.

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

John Passmore (1914-2004) on the Moral Status of Animals

Animal Ethics

One restriction on the absolutism of man's rule over Nature is now generally accepted: moral philosophers and public opinion agree that it is morally impermissible to be cruel to animals. Controversies no doubt remain.

Morals 40
article thumbnail

Animal Companions

Animal Ethics

The sleight of hand that gave us the “selfish” gene gives us the rights of baboons. By abusing evolutionary biology in this way, we are able to read back the sophisticated conduct of people into the animal behavior that prefigures it. It is not that they do no wrong, but that “right” and “wrong” here make no sense.

Animal 40
article thumbnail

R. G. Frey on Egoism and Utilitarianism

Animal Ethics

For, at least as both are usually construed, the only major difference between ethical egoism and act-utilitarianism is that the egoist is concerned with maximizing utility in his own case, so that only consequences which affect him bear upon the rightness and wrongness of his acts.

Bears 40
article thumbnail

R. G. Frey on the Principle of the Equal Consideration of Interests

Animal Ethics

Interests arise, Singer contends, from the capacity to feel pain, which he labels a 'prerequisite' for having interests at all; and animals can and do suffer, can and do feel pain.

article thumbnail

Jan Narveson on Moral Vegetarianism

Animal Ethics

What the utilitarian who defends human carnivorousness must say, then, is something like this: that the amount of pleasure which humans derive per pound of animal flesh exceeds the amount of discomfort and pain per pound which are inflicted on the animals in the process, all things taken into account. Is this plausible?