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?

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?"

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

W. D. Ross (1877-1971) on Animal Rights

Animal Ethics

It may of course be denied that we have duties to animals. On the whole, since we mean by a right something that can be justly claimed, we should probably say that animals have not rights, not because the claim to humane treatment would not be just if it were made, but because they cannot make it.

article thumbnail

Moral Vegetarianism, Part 8 of 13

Animal Ethics

Becoming a vegetarian is the most practical and effective step one can take towards [sic; kbj] ending both the killing of non-human [sic; kbj] animals and the infliction of suffering upon them. One suspects that the SPCA and the American Humane Society have done more to stop cruelty to animals than vegetarians ever could.