CITIZENSHIP GOES TO THE DOGS A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by E. ALEXANDER HOWE Dr. Peter Vallentyne, Dissertation Supervisor May 2020 © Copyright by Ethan Alexander Howe 2020 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the thesis entitled CITIZENSHIP GOES TO DOGS presented by E. Alexander Howe, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. ______________________________________________ Professor Peter Vallentyne ______________________________________________ Professor Robert Johnson ______________________________________________ Professor Peter Markie ______________________________________________ Professor Paul Litton For two brother donkeys ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the steady guidance of Peter Vallentyne. His patience and grace were not lost on me. Our minds work differently, and I am grateful that after so many years my mind has finally figured out how to work even a small bit more like his. Similar gratitude is owed to Joshua Smart, who provided me with countless hours of engaged discussion as I tried to wrap my mind around such a strange topic. Without the mentorship of Drs. Vallentyne and Smart, my project would be a puddle of nonsense with vanishingly little of interest to say. I am further grateful to Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka for writing Zoopolis, to Bob Fischer for his trailblazing, to the members of my committee for their willingness to engage with my work, and to the friends who kept me sane all of these years. Finally, my eternal gratitude goes to Pam Shamburg and Corey Kern for plucking me out of the academy and for giving me the space that I needed from myself in order to finally complete this dissertation. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................................................ ii Abstract ............................................................................................ iii Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................... 3 1.2 Introduction ................................................................................... 8 Chapter 2: Grounding Basic Citizenship Rights ............................... 15 2.1 Narrowing the Pool ........................................................................ 17 2.1.1 Species Membership .................................................................................................. 18 2.1.2 Species Norms ............................................................................................................. 21 2.1.3 Appeal to Kinds .......................................................................................................... 23 2.1.4 Appeals to Potential ................................................................................................... 27 2.1.5 Appealing to Care ....................................................................................................... 30 2.1.6 Hypothetical Object of Care ....................................................................................... 32 2.1.7 Being a Rearee ........................................................................................................... 35 2.1.8 Social Contribution .................................................................................................... 40 2.1.9 Being Bound by State Law ......................................................................................... 42 2.2 The Final Candidate ...................................................................... 43 2.3 No Defeaters ................................................................................. 49 2.3.1 Undercutting .............................................................................................................. 50 2.3.2 Overriding .................................................................................................................. 52 2.3.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 54 2.4 Conclusion .................................................................................... 55 Chapter 3: Non-Autonomous Humans ............................................ 56 3.1 Legal Personhood ......................................................................... 57 3.2 Rights of the Body ......................................................................... 62 3.2.1 Bodily Security ........................................................................................................... 62 3.2.2 Mobility ...................................................................................................................... 65 3.3 Socialization ................................................................................. 69 3.4 Procedural Rights .......................................................................... 71 3.4.1 Legal Standing ........................................................................................................... 72 3.4.2 Legislative Standing ................................................................................................... 74 3.5 Conclusion .................................................................................... 78 Chapter 4: Domestic Animals .......................................................... 79 4.1 The Vulnerability of Domestic Animals ........................................ 80 4.1.1 Undercutting Defeaters ............................................................................................. 83 4.1.2 Overriding Defeaters ................................................................................................. 87 4.2 Legal Personhood ......................................................................... 89 4.3 Rights of the Body ......................................................................... 91 4.4 Socialization ................................................................................. 96 4.5 Procedural Rights ......................................................................... 99 4.5.1 Legal Standing ........................................................................................................... 99 4.5.2 Legislative Standing ................................................................................................... 99 4.6 Conclusion .................................................................................. 100 Chapter 5: Conclusion ................................................................... 102 5.1 Situating the Political AMC ......................................................... 102 5.2 Future Directions ........................................................................ 111 Bibliography .................................................................................. 116 Vita ................................................................................................. 135 CITIZENSHIP GOES TO THE DOGS Alex Howe Dr. Peter Vallentyne, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT The conclusion I defend is that “domestic animals” have a moral claim to what I refer to as “basic citizenship rights,” and that they do so for the same reason that “non-autonomous humans” do. I define each of these key terms. The bulk of this dissertation is structured around the following formal argument, which I refer to as the Political AMC, on account of its strategy being borrowed from the so-called Argument from Marginal Cases, or AMC: (P1) Non-rationally autonomous humans have an undefeated moral claim to basic citizenship rights. (P2) If non-rationally autonomous humans have an undefeated moral claim to basic citizenship rights, then possessing vulnerability and no decisive defeaters is a sufficient condition for having an undefeated claim to basic citizenship rights. (C1) Possessing vulnerability and no decisive defeaters is a sufficient condition for having a claim to basic citizenship rights. (P3) Domestic animals possess vulnerability and no decisive defeaters. (C2) Domestic animals have an undefeated claim to basic citizenship rights. The defense offered for Premise 2 is abductive—an inference to the best explanation—and treated accordingly. iii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Typical humans in a political community—i.e., a state—enjoy certain affordances. They might be permitted to have their interests reflected in the collective decision-making process, such as through voting. They may also be protected by the military and by domestic law enforcement. Still more, they will have relatively unrestricted access to public areas as well as access to the legal system (e.g., standing to bring civil suits). Finally, they will enjoy the guarantee of self- determination.1 But the same is not true for every morally relevant entity who lives within the bounds of the political community’s territory, or the state.2 The question then becomes: in virtue of what do certain individuals but not others get these sorts of affordances? Indeed, the quality of life that the recipients of these protections experience is significantly different—and presumably better—than the quality of life enjoyed by other