DOCSLIB.ORG

Weighing Animal Lives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Weighing Animal Lives ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS Uppsala Studies in Social Ethics 38 Fredrik Karlsson Weighing Animal Lives A Critical Assessment of Justification and Prioritization in Animal-Rights Theories Uppsala 2009 Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Ihresalen, Thunbergs- vägen 3B, Campus Engelska Parken, Uppsala University, Friday, 25 September, 2009 at 10.15 a.m. for the degree of Doctor of Theology. The examination will be conducted in English. Abstract Karlsson, F. 2009. Weighing Animal Lives: A Critical Assessment of Justification and Prioriti- zation in Animal-Rights Theories. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Studies in Social Ethics 38. 341 pp. Uppsala. ISBN 978-91-554-7576-5. The project underlying this dissertation aims at analyzing three pro-animal-rights theories, evaluating the theories, and outlining an alternative theoretical account of animal rights. The analytical categories are justification and function of animal rights, the definition of the right holder, and the resolution approach to rights conflict. The categories are applied to a natural, a theocentric, and a contractarian approach to defend animal rights. The evaluation is substantiated by the assumption that rights are meant to protect less powerful beings against more powerful aggressors. The constructive segment is an investigation into what extent identified disadvan- tages of the theories can be avoided by outlining a new model for animal rights. The analyses and evaluation suggest that all three theories are at risk of contradicting the proper function of rights-based theories. Tom Regan’s naturalist account of animal rights in- cludes a logical possibility to sacrifice less capable beings for the sake of more capable beings. Andrew Linzey’s theocentric case for animal rights may sometimes mean that vulnerable human persons should be sacrificed for more powerful non-human beings. Mark Rowlands’ outlined contractarian model, further reconstructed in this work, fails to provide a way to resolve rights conflicts, making the function of rights inapplicable to conflicts. In conclusion, it is suggested that defining the right holder as a self-preservative being can be supported by, at least, the contractarian rationale. That would also conform to the proper function of rights-based theories. It is also suggested that this means that rights conflicts should be resolved by a voluntary sacrifice of the most powerful being. Practical circumstances should be created where such voluntarity is both genuine and rationally possible. Keywords: Animal rights, justification, prioritization, applied ethics, proper function, justice, rights language, vivisection, rights conflict Fredrik Karlsson, Ethics and Philosophy of Religion, Box 511, Uppsala University, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden © Fredrik Karlsson 2009 ISSN 0346-6507 ISBN 978-91-554-7576-5 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-107288 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-107288) Printed in Sweden by Edita Västra Aros, Västerås 2009. Distributor: Uppsala University Library, Box 510, SE- 751 20 Uppsala www.uu.se, [email protected] Contents Acknowledgements.............................................................................. 9 Introduction........................................................................................ 11 The purpose and problems ............................................................ 15 Rights language ........................................................................ 16 Justification of animal rights .................................................... 17 The right holder ........................................................................ 18 Function of rights ..................................................................... 19 Rights conflicts......................................................................... 20 Evaluative criteria ......................................................................... 23 Intersubjectivity........................................................................ 24 Applicability ............................................................................. 27 Proper function ......................................................................... 29 Reading ......................................................................................... 32 Materials........................................................................................ 35 Previous research .......................................................................... 39 Outline........................................................................................... 41 1. Rights Language and Animals....................................................... 43 The concepts of rights applied to the animal case......................... 45 Rights and powers .................................................................... 46 The claim-right view and the entitlement view ........................ 52 The function of rights.................................................................... 57 The good for animals................................................................ 62 Moral justification......................................................................... 65 Three kinds of moral justification ............................................ 68 The right holder............................................................................. 71 Conflicts of rights.......................................................................... 74 The bundle of right to life......................................................... 77 The complexity of rights in conflict ......................................... 79 Maximizing and non-maximizing resolution approaches......... 80 Equality and rights conflicts..................................................... 84 Summary ....................................................................................... 85 2. Natural Animal Rights................................................................... 87 Non-human animal consciousness ................................................ 88 A common nature for human and non-human animals............. 89 The belief–desire theory and common preference-beliefs........ 95 A natural justification of animal rights ....................................... 101 The theoretical basis for evaluating moral principles............. 103 The harm principle.................................................................. 105 The respect principle .............................................................. 107 The right to respectful treatment............................................. 109 The function of the right to respect ............................................. 111 Animal autonomy ................................................................... 111 The good for animals.............................................................. 112 Harm....................................................................................... 115 Respectful treatment............................................................... 117 The right holder........................................................................... 118 The subject-of-a-life and inherent value................................. 119 The subject-of-a-life as a new view of animals...................... 120 Subject-of-a-life and analogies............................................... 121 Conflict resolution and the natural-rights approach.................... 125 The miniride principle ............................................................ 125 The worse-off principle .......................................................... 128 Special considerations ............................................................ 130 Summary ..................................................................................... 132 3. Theocentric Animal Rights.......................................................... 135 The Christian background ........................................................... 136 Theocentric Christian ethics ................................................... 136 Doctrine of creation................................................................ 139 Christology ............................................................................. 143 To serve God is to liberate the creation.................................. 145 A theocentric justification of animal rights................................. 148 The function of theocentric animal rights ................................... 154 The right holder........................................................................... 158 The reverence for life ............................................................. 158 Animals in the moral community ........................................... 160 The role of humankind ........................................................... 161 Against sentientism................................................................. 163 Instrumental value or inherent value ...................................... 165 Conflict resolution and theocentric animal rights ....................... 168 Against equality...................................................................... 169 For generosity......................................................................... 169 For generosity, because of equality ........................................ 171 Summary ..................................................................................... 173 4. Contractarian Animal Rights ......................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Are Illegal Direct Actions by Animal Rights Activists Ethically Vigilante?
    260 BETWEEN THE SPECIES Is the Radical Animal Rights Movement Ethically Vigilante? ABSTRACT Following contentious debates around the status and justifiability of illegal direct actions by animal rights activists, we introduce a here- tofore unexplored perspective that argues they are neither terrorist nor civilly disobedient but ethically vigilante. Radical animal rights movement (RARM) activists are vigilantes for vulnerable animals and their rights. Hence, draconian measures by the constitutional state against RARM vigilantes are both disproportionate and ille- gitimate. The state owes standing and toleration to such principled vigilantes, even though they are self-avowed anarchists and anti-stat- ists—unlike civil disobedients—repudiating allegiance to the con- stitutional order. This requires the state to acknowledge the ethical nature of challenges to its present regime of toleration, which assigns special standing to illegal actions in defense of human equality, but not equality and justice between humans and animals. Michael Allen East Tennessee State University Erica von Essen Environmental Communications Division Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Volume 22, Issue 1 Fall 2018 http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/bts/ 261 Michael Allen and Erica von Essen Introduction We explore the normative status of illegal actions under- taken by the Radical Animal Rights Movement (RARM), such as animal rescue, trespass, and sabotage as well as confronta- tion and intimidation. RARM typically characterizes these ac- tions as examples of direct action rather than civil disobedience (Milligan 2015, Pellow 2014). Moreover, many RARM activ- ists position themselves as politically anarchist, anti-statist, and anti-capitalist (Best 2014, Pellow 2014). Indeed, the US and UK take these self-presentations at face value, responding to RARM by introducing increasingly draconian legislation that treats them as terrorists (Best 2014, McCausland, O’Sullivan and Brenton 2013, O’Sullivan 2011, Pellow 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Ethology: on the Extents of What It Is to Be a Pig
    Society & Animals 19 (2011) 83-101 brill.nl/soan Philosophical Ethology: On the Extents of What It Is to Be a Pig Jes Harfeld Aarhus University, Denmark [email protected] Abstract Answers to the question, “What is a farm animal?” often revolve around genetics, physical attri- butes, and the animals’ functions in agricultural production. The essential and defining charac- teristics of farm animals transcend these limited models, however, and require an answer that avoids reductionism and encompasses a de-atomizing point of view. Such an answer should promote recognition of animals as beings with extensive mental and social capabilities that out- line the extent of each individual animal’s existence and—at the same time—define the animals as parts of wholes that in themselves are more than the sum of their parts and have ethological as well as ethical relevance. To accomplish this, the concepts of both anthropomorphism and sociobiology will be examined, and the article will show how the possibility of understanding animals and their characteristics deeply affects both ethology and philosophy; that is, it has an important influence on our descriptive knowledge of animals, the concept of what animal wel- fare is and can be, and any normative ethics that follow such knowledge. Keywords animal ethics, animal welfare, ethology, philosophy, sociobiology Preface The historical and theoretical background for this article is an ongoing debate in the interdisciplinary fields of biology and philosophy. On the one hand, the ideas presented in this article originate in the descriptive biological sciences— for example, classic and cognitive ethology, genetic evolutionary theory, and sociobiology.
    [Show full text]
  • "Go Veg" Campaigns of US Animal Rights Organizations
    Society and Animals 18 (2010) 163-182 brill.nl/soan Framing Animal Rights in the “Go Veg” Campaigns of U.S. Animal Rights Organizations Carrie Packwood Freeman Georgia State University [email protected] Abstract How much do animal rights activists talk about animal rights when they attempt to persuade America’s meat-lovers to stop eating nonhuman animals? Th is study serves as the basis for a unique evaluation and categorization of problems and solutions as framed by fi ve major U.S. animal rights organizations in their vegan/food campaigns. Th e fi ndings reveal that the organiza- tions framed the problems as: cruelty and suff ering; commodifi cation; harm to humans and the environment; and needless killing. To solve problems largely blamed on factory farming, activists asked consumers to become “vegetarian” (meaning vegan) or to reduce animal product con- sumption, some requesting “humane” reforms. While certain messages supported animal rights, promoting veganism and respect for animals’ subject status, many frames used animal welfare ideology to achieve rights solutions, conservatively avoiding a direct challenge to the dominant human/animal dualism. In support of ideological authenticity, this paper recommends that vegan campaigns emphasize justice, respect, life, freedom, environmental responsibility, and a shared animality. Keywords animal rights, campaigns, farm animal, framing, ideology, vegan, vegetarian How much do or should animal rights activists talk about animal rights when they attempt to persuade America’s meat-lovers to stop eating animals? As participants in a counterhegemonic social movement, animal rights organiza- tions are faced with the discursive challenge of redefi ning accepted practices, such as farming and eating nonhuman animals, as socially unacceptable practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Cephalopods and the Evolution of the Mind
    Cephalopods and the Evolution of the Mind Peter Godfrey-Smith The Graduate Center City University of New York Pacific Conservation Biology 19 (2013): 4-9. In thinking about the nature of the mind and its evolutionary history, cephalopods – especially octopuses, cuttlefish, and squid – have a special importance. These animals are an independent experiment in the evolution of large and complex nervous systems – in the biological machinery of the mind. They evolved this machinery on a historical lineage distant from our own. Where their minds differ from ours, they show us another way of being a sentient organism. Where we are similar, this is due to the convergence of distinct evolutionary paths. I introduced the topic just now as 'the mind.' This is a contentious term to use. What is it to have a mind? One option is that we are looking for something close to what humans have –– something like reflective and conscious thought. This sets a high bar for having a mind. Another possible view is that whenever organisms adapt to their circumstances in real time by adjusting their behavior, taking in information and acting in response to it, there is some degree of mentality or intelligence there. To say this sets a low bar. It is best not to set bars in either place. Roughly speaking, we are dealing with a matter of degree, though 'degree' is not quite the right term either. The evolution of a mind is the acquisition of a tool-kit for the control of behavior. The tool-kit includes some kind of perception, though different animals have very different ways of taking in information from the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness Marian Dawkins1 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 1Corresponding author: e-mail address: [email protected] Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Animal Consciousness: The Heart of the Paradox 2 2.1 Behaviorism Applies to Other People Too 5 3. Human Emotions and Animals Emotions 7 3.1 Physiological Indicators of Emotion 7 3.2 Behavioral Components of Emotion 8 3.2.1 Vacuum Behavior 10 3.2.2 Rebound 10 3.2.3 “Abnormal” Behavior 10 3.2.4 The Animal’s Point of View 11 3.2.5 Cognitive Bias 15 3.2.6 Expressions of the Emotions 15 3.3 The Third Component of Emotion: Consciousness 16 4. Definitions of Animal Welfare 24 5. Conclusions 26 References 27 1. INTRODUCTION Consciousness has always been both central to and a stumbling block for animal welfare. On the one hand, the belief that nonhuman animals suffer and feel pain is what draws many people to want to study animal welfare in the first place. Animal welfare is seen as fundamentally different from plant “welfare” or the welfare of works of art precisely because of the widely held belief that animals have feelings and experience emotions in ways that plants or inanimate objectsdhowever valuableddo not (Midgley, 1983; Regan, 1984; Rollin, 1989; Singer, 1975). On the other hand, consciousness is also the most elusive and difficult to study of any biological phenomenon (Blackmore, 2012; Koch, 2004). Even with our own human consciousness, we are still baffled as to how Advances in the Study of Behavior, Volume 47 ISSN 0065-3454 © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Overstepping Ethical Boundaries? Limitations on State Efforts to Provide Access to Justice in Family Courts
    OVERSTEPPING ETHICAL BOUNDARIES? LIMITATIONS ON STATE EFFORTS TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN FAMILY COURTS Jessica Dixon Weaver* Family law courts in America are overwhelmed with self-represented parties who try their best to navigate an unfamiliar territory laden with procedural and evidentiary rules. Efforts to level the playing field in these courts have resulted in state entities and judges taking on roles that previously belonged to attorneys. State supreme court judges and state agencies draft and promulgate family law forms, such as divorce pleadings and paternity acknowledgments, to provide poor citizens access to justice. While these efforts have resulted in positive outcomes for some families, reliance on the state’s imprimatur has caused significant harm to others. Upon closer examination, the state has not adhered to the same ethical standards that ordinarily apply to judges and attorneys with regard to the development and dissemination of these forms. This Article is the first to explore whether state courts and agencies have overstepped ethical boundaries and subverted public interest to satisfy private interests of the state as regulator. It argues that these state forms are poor substitutes for attorneys and that the complexities of family law continue to warrant legal counsel in our current adversarial court practice. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 2706 I. FAMILY COURT OVERLOAD ................................................................ 2708 A. The Proliferation of Family Court Cases and the Rise of Pro Se Litigants ......................................................... 2708 B. The Complexities of Family Law ............................................ 2712 * Assistant Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law. J.D., University of Virginia School of Law; B.A., University of Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Rolston on Animals, Ethics, and the Factory Farm
    [Expositions 6.1 (2012) 29–40] Expositions (online) ISSN: 1747–5376 Unnaturally Cruel: Rolston on Animals, Ethics, and the Factory Farm CHRISTIAN DIEHM University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point In 2010, over nine billion animals were killed in the United States for human consumption. This included nearly 1 million calves, 2.5 million sheep and lambs, 34 million cattle, 110 million hogs, 242 million turkeys, and well over 8.7 billion chickens (USDA 2011a; 2011b). Though hundreds of slaughterhouses actively contributed to these totals, more than half of the cattle just mentioned were killed at just fourteen plants. A slightly greater percentage of hogs was killed at only twelve (USDA 2011a). Chickens were processed in a total of three hundred and ten federally inspected facilities (USDA 2011b), which means that if every facility operated at the same capacity, each would have slaughtered over fifty-three birds per minute (nearly one per second) in every minute of every day, adding up to more than twenty-eight million apiece over the course of twelve months.1 Incredible as these figures may seem, 2010 was an average year for agricultural animals. Indeed, for nearly a decade now the total number of birds and mammals killed annually in the US has come in at or above the nine billion mark, and such enormous totals are possible only by virtue of the existence of an equally enormous network of industrialized agricultural suppliers. These high-volume farming operations – dubbed “factory farms” by the general public, or “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)” by state and federal agencies – are defined by the ways in which they restrict animals’ movements and behaviors, locate more and more bodies in less and less space, and increasingly mechanize many aspects of traditional husbandry.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Social Issues with Film
    Teaching Social Issues with Film Teaching Social Issues with Film William Benedict Russell III University of Central Florida INFORMATION AGE PUBLISHING, INC. Charlotte, NC • www.infoagepub.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Russell, William B. Teaching social issues with film / William Benedict Russell. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-60752-116-7 (pbk.) -- ISBN 978-1-60752-117-4 (hardcover) 1. Social sciences--Study and teaching (Secondary)--Audio-visual aids. 2. Social sciences--Study and teaching (Secondary)--Research. 3. Motion pictures in education. I. Title. H62.2.R86 2009 361.0071’2--dc22 2009024393 Copyright © 2009 Information Age Publishing Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America Contents Preface and Overview .......................................................................xiii Acknowledgments ............................................................................. xvii 1 Teaching with Film ................................................................................ 1 The Russell Model for Using Film ..................................................... 2 2 Legal Issues ............................................................................................ 7 3 Teaching Social Issues with Film
    [Show full text]
  • Laboratory Primate Newsletter
    LABORATORY PRIMATE NEWSLETTER Vol. 44, No. 3 July 2005 JUDITH E. SCHRIER, EDITOR JAMES S. HARPER, GORDON J. HANKINSON AND LARRY HULSEBOS, ASSOCIATE EDITORS MORRIS L. POVAR, CONSULTING EDITOR ELVA MATHIESEN, ASSISTANT EDITOR ALLAN M. SCHRIER, FOUNDING EDITOR, 1962-1987 Published Quarterly by the Schrier Research Laboratory Psychology Department, Brown University Providence, Rhode Island ISSN 0023-6861 POLICY STATEMENT The Laboratory Primate Newsletter provides a central source of information about nonhuman primates and re- lated matters to scientists who use these animals in their research and those whose work supports such research. The Newsletter (1) provides information on care and breeding of nonhuman primates for laboratory research, (2) dis- seminates general information and news about the world of primate research (such as announcements of meetings, research projects, sources of information, nomenclature changes), (3) helps meet the special research needs of indi- vidual investigators by publishing requests for research material or for information related to specific research prob- lems, and (4) serves the cause of conservation of nonhuman primates by publishing information on that topic. As a rule, research articles or summaries accepted for the Newsletter have some practical implications or provide general information likely to be of interest to investigators in a variety of areas of primate research. However, special con- sideration will be given to articles containing data on primates not conveniently publishable elsewhere. General descriptions of current research projects on primates will also be welcome. The Newsletter appears quarterly and is intended primarily for persons doing research with nonhuman primates. Back issues may be purchased for $5.00 each.
    [Show full text]
  • Poetry and the Multiple Drafts Model: the Functional Similarity of Cole Swensen's Verse and Human Consciousness
    University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 6-1-2011 Poetry and the Multiple Drafts Model: The Functional Similarity of Cole Swensen's Verse and Human Consciousness Connor Ryan Kreimeyer Fisher University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the American Literature Commons, and the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Fisher, Connor Ryan Kreimeyer, "Poetry and the Multiple Drafts Model: The Functional Similarity of Cole Swensen's Verse and Human Consciousness" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 202. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/202 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. POETRY AND THE MULTIPLE DRAFTS MODEL: THE FUNCTIONAL SIMILARITY OF COLE SWENSEN’S VERSE AND HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS __________ A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Arts and Humanities University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts __________ by Connor Ryan Kreimeyer Fisher June 2011 Advisor: W. Scott Howard Author: Connor Ryan Kreimeyer Fisher Title: POETRY AND THE MULTIPLE DRAFTS MODEL: THE FUNCTIONAL SIMILARITY OF COLE SWENSEN’S VERSE AND HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS Advisor: W. Scott Howard Degree Date: June 2011 Abstract This project compares the operational methods of three of Cole Swensen’s books of poetry (Such Rich Hour , Try , and Goest ) with ways in which the human mind and consciousness function.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethical Consistency of Animal Equality
    1 The ethical consistency of animal equality Stijn Bruers, Sept 2013, DRAFT 2 Contents 0. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 5 0.1 SUMMARY: TOWARDS A COHERENT THEORY OF ANIMAL EQUALITY ........................................................................ 9 1. PART ONE: ETHICAL CONSISTENCY ......................................................................................................... 18 1.1 THE BASIC ELEMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 18 a) The input data: moral intuitions .......................................................................................................... 18 b) The method: rule universalism............................................................................................................. 20 1.2 THE GOAL: CONSISTENCY AND COHERENCE ..................................................................................................... 27 1.3 THE PROBLEM: MORAL ILLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 30 a) Optical illusions .................................................................................................................................... 30 b) Moral illusions ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Student Handbook, Revised 12/2020
    Revised 12/2020 BRTC Student Handbook 2020-21 Table of Contents Policy Statement 5 BRTC Mission Statement 5 BRTC Vision 5 BRTC Values 5 Academic Advising 5 Accidents/Medical Conditions 6 Accidents 6 Seizure Disorders 6 Adding and Dropping Courses 6 Administrative Withdrawal 6 Accuplacer 7 American College Testing Program (ACT) 7 Bookstore 7 Cafeteria 7 Career Pathways 8 Career Services 8 Campus Presence of Children, Other Family Members, or Friends 8 Civil Rights 8 Class Attendance 9 CLEP 9 Clery Act/Campus Security Policy 9 Clubs and Student Organizations 9 Student Organizations Speakers 10 Renewing a Student Organization: 11 Art Club 11 Music Club 11 Professional Business Leaders 11 Student Activities Board (SAB) 12 Student Ambassadors 12 Student Government Association 12 Phi Theta Kappa 12 Computer and Network Acceptable Use Policy 13 Acceptable Use 13 2 Version: 2.3 Revised 12/2020 BRTC Student Handbook 2020-21 Unacceptable Use 13 Computer Labs 14 Counseling 15 Disability Services 16 Drug Awareness Program 16 Education Awareness 16 Consultation Services 16 Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action 16 Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) 17 Filing a Complaint on Staff Member or Instructor 19 Firearms 19 Health and Wellness 19 Immunizations 19 Inclement Weather 20 Missing Person 20 Personal Identification Changes 20 Parking 20 Parking Permits 21 Parking Fines 21 Physical Examinations and Drug Screens 21 Posting 21 Racial Profiling Policy 22 Sexual Harassment Policy (Title IX) 22 Service Animals 23 Service Animal Liability 23
    [Show full text]