Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Discussion of Josh Milburn’s Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals.Angie Pepper - 2024 - Food Ethics 9 (1):1-9.
    In Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals, Josh Milburn thinks through the implications of feeding animals by focusing on the relationships between humans and three different groups of animals: (1) animal companions; (2) animal neighbours; and (3) wild animals. In my comments, I concentrate on how the actions and agency interests of these animals problematise some of Milburn’s assumptions and normative prescriptions. My overall aim is to show how giving animal agency more prominence in our thinking about what we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Animal rights, animal research, and the need to reimagine science.Christopher Bobier, Noah Reinhardt & Kate Pawlowski - 2024 - The New Bioethics 30 (1):63-76.
    What would it look like for researchers to take non-human animal rights seriously? Recent discussions foster the impression that scientific practice needs to be reformed to make animal research ethical: just as there is ethically rigorous human research, so there can be ethically rigorous animal research. We argue that practically little existing animal research would be ethical and that ethical animal research is not scalable. Since animal research is integral to the existing scientific paradigm, taking animal rights seriously requires a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • An Inclusive Account of the Permissibility of Sex: Considering Children, Non-human Animals, and People with Intellectual Disabilities.Adrià Rodríguez Moret - 2024 - Social Theory and Practice 50 (2):307-333.
    A complete theory of the permissibility of sex must not only determine the permissibility of sex between typical adult humans. In addition, it must also adequately take into consideration sex acts involving non-human animals, children, and humans with intellectual disabilities. However, when trying to develop a non-discriminatory account that includes these beings, two worrying problems of animal sex arise. To surpass them, I argue for a reformulation of the standard theory. To produce a truly inclusive account our theory should be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Relational nonhuman personhood.Nicolas Delon - 2023 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 61 (4):569-587.
    This article defends a relational account of personhood. I argue that the structure of personhood consists of dyadic relations between persons who can wrong or be wronged by one another, even if some of them lack moral competence. I draw on recent work on directed duties to outline the structure of moral communities of persons. The upshot is that we can construct an inclusive theory of personhood that can accommodate nonhuman persons based on shared community membership. I argue that, once (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • ‘Utilitarianism for animals: deontology for people’ and the doing/allowing distinction.Fiona Woollard - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 180 (4):1149-1168.
    It is tempting to think that zebras, goats, lions, and similar animals matter morally, but not in quite the same way people do. This might lead us to adopt a hybrid view of animal ethics such as ‘Utilitarianism for Animals; Deontology for People’. One of the core commitments of deontology is the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing (DDA): the view that doing harm is harder to justify than allowing harm. I explore how this core tenant of deontology applies to non-person, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)The Reification of Non-Human Animals.Silvia Caprioglio Panizza - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (1):1-15.
    This paper takes up Axel Honneth’s suggestion that we, in the 21st century Western world, should revisit the Marxian idea of reification; unlike Honneth, however, this paper applies reification to the ways in which humans relate to non-human animals, particularly in the context of scientific experiments. Thinking about these practices through the lens of reification, the paper argues, yields a more helpful understanding of what is regarded as problematic in those practices than the standard animal rights approaches. The second part (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Harm of Desire Modification in Non-human Animals: Circumventing Control, Diminishing Ownership and Undermining Agency.Marc G. Wilcox - 2022 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 35 (3):1-15.
    It is seemingly bad for animals to have their desires modified in at least some cases, for instance where brainwashing or neurological manipulation takes place. In humans, many argue that such modification interferes with our positive liberty or undermines our autonomy but this explanation is inapplicable in the case of animals as they lack the capacity for autonomy in the relevant sense. As such, the standard view has been that, despite any intuitions to the contrary, the modification of animals’ desires (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Covid-19 and the future of zoos.Angie Pepper & Kristin Voigt - 2021 - Les Ateliers de l'Éthique / the Ethics Forum 16 (1):68-87.
    The COVID-19 crisis has left zoos especially vulnerable to bankruptcy, and the precarity of their financial situation threatens the lives and well-being of the animals who live in them. In this paper, we argue that while we and our governments have a responsibility to ensure the protection of animals in struggling zoos, it is morally impermissible to make private donations or state subsidies to zoos because such actions serve to perpetuate an unjust institution. In order to protect zoo animals without (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Animal Research that Respects Animal Rights: Extending Requirements for Research with Humans to Animals.Angela K. Martin - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):59-72.
    The purpose of this article is to show that animal rights are not necessarily at odds with the use of animals for research. If animals hold basic moral rights similar to those of humans, then we should consequently extend the ethical requirements guiding research with humans to research with animals. The article spells out how this can be done in practice by applying the seven requirements for ethical research with humans proposed by Ezekiel Emanuel, David Wendler and Christine Grady to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Political Agency in Humans and Other Animals.Angie Pepper - 2021 - Contemporary Political Theory 20 (2):296-317.
    In virtue of their capacity for political agency, political agents can possess special rights, powers, and responsibilities, such as rights to political participation and freedom of speech. Traditionally, political theorists have assumed that only cognitively unimpaired adult humans are political agents, and thus that only those humans can be the bearers of these rights, powers, and responsibilities. However, recent work in animal rights theory has extended the concept of political agency to nonhuman animals. In this article, I develop an account (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Totalism, Animals, and the Repugnant Conclusion.Gary David O'Brien - 2024 - Utilitas 36 (3):211-229.
    Totalism states that one population is better than another iff it has higher total welfare. One counterintuitive consequence is the Repugnant Conclusion (RC). Totalism also entails that a very large population of animals with lives barely worth living is better than a smaller population of happier humans. Furthermore, the strategies that have been used to avoid the troubling normative implications of the RC do not work in the animal case, so we may have reason to bring about such a population. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Why Sentience Should be the Only Basis of Moral Status.Matthew Wray Perry - 2024 - The Journal of Ethics 28 (4):719-741.
    It is fairly commonplace to think that the capacity for sentience need not be the only basis of moral status. Pluralists contend that moral status is grounded in several other valuable capacities as well as, or instead of, sentience, such as agency, empathy, or sociality. However, this contention contrasts with a standard assumption in animal ethics: that sentience should be the only basis of moral status. This article vindicates that assumption. Whilst classical utilitarians have defended a similar claim about sentience (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Relational Animal Ethics (and why it isn’t easy).Josh Milburn - 2024 - Food Ethics 9 (1):1-11.
    In Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals, I explore a range of overlooked practical questions in animal ethics and the philosophy of food, developing a new approach to animal ethics. According to the position I defend, animals have negative rights based on their possession of normatively significant interests, and we have positive obligations towards (and concerning) animals based on our normatively salient relationships with them. Gary O’Brien, Angie Pepper, Clare Palmer, and Leon Borgdorf offer a range of insightful challenges (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)The Reification of Non-Human Animals.Silvia Caprioglio Panizza - 2023 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (1):90-104.
    This paper takes up Axel Honneth’s suggestion that we, in the 21st century Western world, should revisit the Marxian idea of reification; unlike Honneth, however, this paper applies reification to the ways in which humans relate to non-human animals, particularly in the context of scientific experiments. Thinking about these practices through the lens of reification, the paper argues, yields a more helpful understanding of what is regarded as problematic in those practices than the standard animal rights approaches. The second part (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Glass Panels and Peepholes: Nonhuman Animals and the Right to Privacy.Angie Pepper - 2020 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 101 (4):628-650.
    In this paper, I defend the claim that many sentient nonhuman animals have a right to privacy. I begin by outlining the view that the human right to privacy protects our interest in shaping different kinds of relationships with one another by giving us control over how we present ourselves to others. I then draw on empirical research to show that nonhuman animals also have this interest, which grounds a right to privacy against us. I further argue that we can (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Self-affirmation in sled dogs? Affordances, perceptual agency, and extreme sport.Eric Gilbertson & Bob Fischer - 2023 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 17 (4):443-455.
    We argue that extreme endurance sport can be valuable for some nonhuman animals. To make the case, we focus specifically on dogsled racing. We argue that, given certain views about the nature of self-affirmation, perceptual agency, and affordances, sled dogs are capable of realizing significant value through extreme endurance running. Because our focus is on the axiological question of the nature of the value of the sport for its participants, we do not claim that extreme dogsledding is ethical; indeed, we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Animal behaviour and welfare research: A One Health perspective.James William Yeates - 2024 - Research Ethics 20 (3):411-432.
    Animal behaviour and welfare research are part of a wider endeavour to optimize the health and wellbeing of humans, animals and ecosystems. As such, it is part of the One Health research agenda. This article applies ethical principles described by the One Health High Level Expert Panel to animal behaviour and welfare research. These principles entail that animal behaviour and welfare research should be valued equitably alongside other research in transdisciplinary and multisectoral collaboration. It should include and promote a multiplicity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark