Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Silencing Philosophers: Minteer and the Foundations of Anti-foundationalism.J. Baird Callicott - 1999 - Environmental Values 8 (4):499-516.
    In 'No Experience Necessary: Foundationalism and the Retreat from Culture in Environmental Ethics'. Ben A. Minteer forgivably misconstrues my critique of moral pluralism. Contrary to Minteer’s representation: I do not accuse moral pluralists of ‘moral promiscuity’: nor do I posit a ‘master principle’ to govern all human action respecting the environment: and although I offer conceptual foundations for environmental ethics, I do not claim that they rest on certain, a priori, and non-empirical intuitions. Rather, the conceptual foundations I offer for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Ethical responsibilities towards dogs: An inquiry into the dog–human relationship. [REVIEW]Kristien Hens - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (1):3-14.
    The conditions of life of many companion animals and the rate at which they are surrendered to shelters raise many ethical issues. What duties do we have towards the dogs that live in our society? To suggest answers to these questions, I first give four possible ways of looking at the relationship between man and dog: master–slave, employer–worker, parent–child, and friend–friend. I argue that the morally acceptable relationships are of a different kind but bears family resemblances to the latter three. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • (1 other version)Seeing Animals, Speaking of Nature.Mimei Ito - 2008 - Theory, Culture and Society 25 (4):119-137.
    This article analyses the use of images in the discourse of animal ethics in an attempt to see how visual cultural studies can contribute to the debate in environmental philosophy. Drawing on Derrida's critique of the utilitarian theory of animal liberation and Mitchell's analysis of iconoclasm in visual culture theories, the article argues that an iconoclastic strategy of visual representation in the discourse of animal ethics undermines the very objective of such an ethical theory. Two case studies — Peter Singer's (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Uniting Ecocentric and Animal Ethics: Combining Non-Anthropocentric Approaches in Conservation and the Care of Domestic Animals.Helen Kopnina, Joe Gray, William Lynn, Anja Heister & Raghav Srivastava - 2023 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 26 (2):265-286.
    Currently, there is no non-anthropocentric guide to the practice of nature conservation and the treatment of invasive species and domestic animals. In examining the so-called ‘ecocentric’ and ‘animal’ ethics, we highlight some differences between them, and argue that the basic aspiration for support of all nonhuman life needs to be retained. We maintain that hierarchies of value need to be flexible, establishing basic principles and then weighing up the options in the context of anthropocentrism, industrial development and human population growth. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Seeing Animals, Speaking of Nature.Mimei Ito - 2008 - Theory, Culture and Society 25 (4):119-137.
    This article analyses the use of images in the discourse of animal ethics in an attempt to see how visual cultural studies can contribute to the debate in environmental philosophy. Drawing on Derrida's critique of the utilitarian theory of animal liberation and Mitchell's analysis of iconoclasm in visual culture theories, the article argues that an iconoclastic strategy of visual representation in the discourse of animal ethics undermines the very objective of such an ethical theory. Two case studies — Peter Singer's (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Humean Nature.Alan Carter - 2000 - Environmental Values 9 (1):3-37.
    It has been argued that there is an irreconcilable difference between those advocating animal liberation or animal rights, on the one hand, and those preferring a wider environmental ethic, which includes concern for non-sentient life-forms and species preservation, on the other. In contrast, I argue that it is possible to provide foundations for both seemingly environmentalist positions by exploring some of the potential of a 'collective-projectivist' reading of Hume – one that seems more consistent with Hume's texts than other readings. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations