©Copyright 2012 Karen S. Emmerman-Mazner Beyond the Basic/Nonbasic Interests Distinction: A Feminist Approach to Inter-Species Moral Conflict and Moral Repair Karen S. Emmerman-Mazner A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2012 Reading Committee: Sara L. Goering, Chair Stephen M. Gardiner Lori Gruen Jean V. Roberts Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Philosophy University of Washington Abstract Beyond the Basic/Nonbasic Interests Distinction: A Feminist Approach to Inter-Species Moral Conflict and Moral Repair Karen S. Emmerman-Mazner Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Sara L. Goering, Associate Professor Department of Philosophy There is no longer a dearth of well-reasoned argumentation for taking animals seriously and thus for questioning our exploitative relationships with them. It is over-determined that animals warrant moral attention. However, playing close attention to animals quickly reveals that taking their interests into account often generates conflicts with humans’ interests. One common way to adjudicate competing claims is to point to a difference between basic interests (food, shelter, water, medical care, and avoiding unnecessary pain) and nonbasic interests (non- subsistence related interests) and claim that basic interests are always more important, morally speaking, than nonbasic ones. For example, a human’s nonbasic interest in delicious chicken soup ought not to trump a chicken’s basic interest in not suffering a horrific life under factory farming conditions and being killed for others’ consumption. Careful attention to humans’ interests reveals, however, that some of our seemingly less important interests are tied to highly valued ends. The chicken soup may play a significant role in my Jewish culture and in my relationship with my grandmother, for example. A tension can arise, therefore, between (1) the insight that animals’ moral considerability warrants that we not harm them in service of nonbasic human interests and (2) the insight that some of our nonbasic interests are nonetheless morally significant. This tension is the focal point of my dissertation. I critically examine three methodologies for managing the tension between strong obligations to animals and the robustness of human interests (from philosophers Peter Singer, Paul Taylor, and Gary Varner). After arguing that all three are deficient in important ways, I recommend a feminist approach to inter-species conflicts of interest that I think best addresses the tension. The feminist approach is pluralist, non-hierarchical, and contextualized. It highlights how relationships of love and care complicate both humans’ and animals’ interests. It also underscores the importance of undertaking the work of moral repair in both the inter-human and inter-species realms when causing harm to some party is unavoidable. Thus, the feminist methodology is well positioned to take seriously our strong obligations to animals without ignoring or discounting the robustness of human interests. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter One: Introduction………………………………………………………………… 1 Chapter Two: Peter Singer’s Minimalist Approach………………………………………. 14 Chapter Three: Paul Taylor’s Moderate Approach……………………………………….. 64 Chapter Four: Gary Varner’s Robust Approach………………………………………….. 117 Chapter Five: Inter-Animal Conflicts of Interest: A Feminist Approach………………… 162 References…………………………………………………………………………………. 232 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my committee for all of their work on my behalf. Sara Goering took me on as her student during her maternity leave. This gesture of selflessness and support was just the beginning of the many gifts she gave me over the past several years. My work is better for having received her careful scrutiny and my life is better for having spent time in her company. I am grateful to my dissertation committee members for their inspiration, encouragement, and philosophical insight (Steve Gardiner, Jean Roberts, Lori Gruen, and Jamie Mayerfeld). I am particularly indebted to Lori for bringing me into the fold of ecofeminist animal theorists and for being an inspiration to me for what it means to be an academic and an activist. Dissertation writing is a lot about wrestling with one’s demons. The wrestling is much easier to bear when one has an extraordinary community of support around oneself. I am lucky enough to have several communities of support. I would like to thank all of the graduate students in the Philosophy department who read and commented on my work. This list includes Ben Almassi, Monica Aufrecht, Jason Benchimol, Renee Conroy, Asia Ferrin, Jeremy Fischer, Rachel Fredericks, Brandon Morgan-Olsen, Janice Moskalik, Chris Partridge, and Amy Reed- Sandoval. Monica and I started graduate school together in the fall of 2003 and the journey from coursework to PhD would have been unbearable without her. Ben Almassi and Renee Conroy are unflagging sources of stability and inspiration. They exemplify generosity and compassion. Ben’s wife, Negin, is a treasured friend. Janice has been a constant source of support over the past several years. We have shared many of the ups and downs of mothering while in graduate school. Amy Reed-Sandoval arrived at the UW during my last few years and we instantly bonded over our approach to philosophy: both Amy and I see philosophy as an important means ii to social change and engagement in the world. I was assigned to be Asia Ferrin’s mentor in the department when she started. Out of that mentor/mentee relationship grew one of my most cherished friendships. Ben Stenberg was my lead TA my first year and has been a loving and supportive presence ever since. Barb Mack ushered me through graduate school with grace and love. Bev Wessel kept me on track and Gina Gould made me laugh. Ann Baker, Ingra Schellenberg, Andrea Woody, and Alison Wylie mentored and befriended me in ways that enriched my time immeasurably. Through his life and tragic death, my friend Saikat Guha reminded me that philosophy is incredibly important but not the only important thing in life. Maria Elena Garcia, Katie Gillespie, and Tony Lucero and I met when working together on Animal Studies at the UW. What started off as a mutual interest in human/animal relationships has turned into friendships that epitomize mutual understanding and love. I am eternally grateful to my community of friends in Seattle outside of the Philosophy Department. They include Sarah Benton Kent, Graham Kent, Elan Lee, Eugene Lin, Raven Bonnar-Pizzorno, Ari Cetron, Heidi Blythe, Owen Braun, Brandelyn Bergstedt, Jennifer Glick, Lori Chudnofsky, Jennifer Mendelson, and Autumn Jacobsen. I have known Rachel Coppola, Amy Dwyer, and Lucretia Koba nearly my entire life. They heard me say, at 16, that I wanted to get a PhD in philosophy and focus on animal ethics. Sarah Standard has been a source of love and friendship for twenty years. More than anyone else, these women know what it took for me to accomplish this life goal. I hope they also know that I would not be here without them. My parents always told me that I could do anything I set my mind to. More importantly, they taught me to question the world I live in and to have the courage of my convictions. My brothers, Daniel and Timothy, helped me develop the sense of humor that enables me to get iii through even the darkest of days. Even though Daniel wants to open a meat store and Tim thinks he is smarter than me, I love them both dearly. I am also very lucky to have married into a family that encouraged and cheered me on throughout graduate school. My thanks to all the Mazners. Jeremy Mazner is the best life partner a person could hope for. From the very beginning of our time together he has taken the pursuit of my dream to be a joint effort. This has meant enduring endless conversations about what, exactly, Paul Taylor meant by “intrinsically incompatible with respect for nature” as well as lovingly guiding me through periods of stress and anxiety that are utterly foreign to his own even-keel disposition. While I was in graduate school, Oliver Mazner grew from a NICU baby to a robust six year old with whom I can both make up ridiculous songs and talk about why holding animals in captivity is morally problematic. He is the embodiment of my hope for the future. Kelly Baker’s love and affection for Oliver made it possible for me to confidently hand him over to someone else’s care so I could focus on my work. Her presence in our lives has been a tremendous gift. Finally, working on my dissertation was an inter-species effort. I thank Irene, Darwin, Foster, and Wiggle for affection and allowing me to share their space while I worked at their homes. My dear friend Willy Baker-Bonjour was an extraordinary dog who played a vital role in my early graduate years. Thanks to Sara’s dog, Grover, for providing comic relief during our meetings. My own cats Théo, Teddy, and Ira have taught me so much about why animals matter and what it means to try to understand what animals want and need from us. When I look at them and their capacity for joy and love I become ever more determined to bring an end to animals’ suffering. iv DEDICATION In loving memory of Norman S. Care, my philosophy advisor at Oberlin College. Norm taught me that philosophy should be as much about what is in your heart as what is in your head. v 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION In the nearly three years it took me to write this dissertation, in the United States alone, approximately 27.4 billion nonhuman animals were slaughtered for human consumption.1 Between three million and three hundred million animals were used in biomedical research.2 Our reliance on animals for human purposes is staggering.