Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Should We Bring Back the Passenger Pigeon? The Ethics of De-Extinction.T. J. Kasperbauer - 2017 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 20 (1):1-14.
    Recent advances in synthetic biology have made it possible to revive extinct species of animals, a process known as ‘de-extinction’. This paper examines two reasons for supporting de-extinction: the potential for de-extinct species to play useful roles in ecosystems; and human valuing of certain de-extinct species. I focus on the particular case of passenger pigeons to argue that the most critical challenge for de-extinction is that it entails significant suffering for sentient individual animals. I also provide reasons to take existence (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Toward a Philosophy of Harm Reduction.Shannon Dea - 2020 - Health Care Analysis 28 (4):302-313.
    In this paper, I offer a prolegomenon to the philosophy of harm reduction. I begin with an overview of the philosophical literature on both harm and harm reduction, and a brief summary of harm reduction scholarship outside of philosophy in order to make the case that philosophers have something to contribute to understanding harm reduction, and moreover that engagement with harm reduction would improve philosophical scholarship. I then proceed to survey and assess the nascent and still modest philosophy of harm (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Reducing Human Numbers and the Size of our Economies is Necessary to Avoid a Mass Extinction and Share Earth Justly with Other Species.Philip Cafaro - 2022 - Philosophia 50 (5):2263-2282.
    Conservation biologists agree that humanity is on the verge of causing a mass extinction and that its primary driver is our immense and rapidly expanding global economy. We are replacing Earth’s ten million wild species with more of ourselves, our domesticated species, our economic support systems, and our trash. In the process, we are creating a duller, tamer, and more dangerous world. The moral case for reducing excessive human impacts on the biosphere is strong on both anthropocentric and biocentric ethical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark