No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Animal Ethics, Rights, and Law: A Basic Bibliography
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Can animals be regarded as part of the moral community? To what extent, if at all, do they have moral rights? Are we wrong to eat them, hunt them, or use them for scientific research? Can animal liberation be squared with the environmental movement? Taylor traces the background of these debates from Aristotle to Darwin and sets out the views of numerous contemporary philosophers – including Peter Singer, Tom Regan, Mary Anne Warren, J. Baird Callicott, and Martha Nussbaum – with ethical theories ranging from utilitarianism to eco-feminism. The new edition also includes provocative quotations from some of the major writers in the field. As the final chapter insists, animal ethics is more than just an “academic” question: it is intimately connected both to our understanding of what it means to be human and to pressing current issues such as food shortages, environmental degradation, and climate change.
Traditionally, sociology has spent much more time exploring relationships between humans, than between humans and other animals. However, this relative neglect is starting to be addressed. For sociologists interested in human identity construction, animals are symbolically important in functioning as a highly complex and ambiguous “other”. Theoretical work analyses the blurring of the human-animal boundary as part of wider social shifts to postmodernity, whilst ethnographic research suggests that human and animal identities are not fixed but are constructed through interaction. After reviewing this literature, the second half of the paper concentrates on animals in science and shows how here too, animals (rodents and primates in particular) are symbolically ambiguous. In the laboratory, as in society, humans and animals have unstable identities. New genetic and computer technologies have attracted much sociological attention, and disagreements remain about the extent to which humananimal boundaries are fundamentally challenged. The value of sociologists’ own categories has also been challenged, by those who argue that social scientists still persist in ignoring the experiences of animals themselves. This opens up notoriously difficult questions about animal agency. The paper has two main aims: First, to draw links between debates about animals in society and animals in science; and second, to highlight the ways in which sociologists interested in animals may benefit from approaches in Science and Technology Studies (STS).
The question of whether sociologists should investigate the subjective experience of non-human others arises regularly in discussions of research on animals. Recent criticism of this research agenda as speculative and therefore unproductive is examined and found wanting. Ample evidence indicates that animals have the capacity to see themselves as objects, which meets sociological criteria for selfhood. Resistance to this possibility highlights the discipline’s entrenched anthropocentrism rather than lack of evidence. Sociological study of the moral status of animals, based on the presence of the self, is warranted because our treatment of animals is connected with numerous “mainstream” sociological issues. As knowledge has brought other forms of oppression to light, it has also helped to challenge and transform oppressive conditions. Consequently, sociologists have an obligation to challenge speciesism as part of a larger system of oppression.
This paper argues that sociology should begin to turn its attention to human-animal interaction and that one particularly effective way to do so is to adopt a phenomenological approach. This approach sees the personality, and thus the personhood of animals, as intersubjectively and reflexively created. Based on ethnographic data collected over three years in animal sanctuaries this paper assesses how animal sanctuary workers labour collectively to establish the identity of the animals under their care and how this, in turn, justifies their attitudes towards, and treatment of, them.
This article was published in the Animal Liberation
Philosophy and Policy Journal (2.2) in 2004. Here is how it was introduced by the editors:
Another controversial and important issue is explored in Lisa Kemmerer‟s essay, “Hunting Tradition: Treaties, Law, and Subsistence Killing.” Kemmerer evaluates North American “subsistence traditions” that hunt animals as an important part of their culture and identities. Looking at rapid changes in these traditions due to modernization, Kemmerer analyzes the discontinuity between the traditional ways and the “ancient ethic” and contemporary
lifestyles, worldviews, and practices. As she shows, many “subsistence tradition” cultures such as the Makah Indians have lost their original identities and only simulate the lifeworld of their distant ancestors. They hunt and fish with modern technologies as they kill animals in unsustainable ways. Kemmerer undertakes an important analysis of the meaning of “tradition,” drawing a distinction between “a continuance of old traditions” and the emergence of a “new tradition,” such that the latter requires a new legitmation for killing
animals that is wanting. She concludes that in the contemporary, non-subsistence world there is no longer a need to kill, and so “harvesting” whales, shooting wolves, trapping fish and the like can no longer be justified. Kemmerer thus calls into question the validity of existing legal treaties protecting the hunting and fishing rights of “subsistence traditions” and calls for policy changes. She dispenses with romantic nostalgia for earlier cultures by showing changes in their society, the level of their killing, and often a lack of respect for life that would appall their ancestors. Kemmerer seeks to avoid ethnocentrism, but without succumbing to a relativism that strips the animal rights advocate of any grounds to criticize “traditional” hunting practices as wrong.
This revised edition helps readers understand and develop their own opinions on the fundamental issues, enduring controversies, and critical developments associated with animal rights.
First published in 1994, Animal Rights: A Reference Handbook was widely acclaimed for its objective look at the ways in which humans treat animals. Extensively revised and updated, this new edition explores the basis for current perspectives on animal rights by addressing the relationship between humans and animals from scientific, philosophical, legal, and religious points of view.
Animal Rights: A Reference Handbook, Second Edition maintains the balance and accessibility of the first edition, letting readers decide the bounds of human responsibility toward animals. It surveys a wide range of controversies surrounding the use of animals in such fields as the food industry, medical research, and the realm of entertainment, as well as the tremendous surge in scientific discoveries and technological advances that have led to new conversations on animal rights in the 21st century.
What is the difference between animal rights and animal welfare? What inspires people to take on the different causes of non-human animals? How do people vary in their views on the rights of animals? Students will be encouraged to think critically as they discover there are no black and white answers to these and other questions. This fascinating collection of profiles is written by and about those who are actively involved in the pro/con aspects of the animal rights and animal welfare movements.
Over 35 individual stories written by those who are on the frontlines, fighting for what they believe, bring the controversies surrounding animal rights and welfare into sharp focus. The same interview questions were asked of each participant. Readers will enjoy the personal element of these profiles, while discovering the similarities and differences among those involved in these movements. An introduction to the volume provides students with the definitions and background information they need to clearly understand the entries that follow and to encourage them to question what they read and to draw their own conclusions.
This is the most detailed and authoritative treatment of the current state of animal welfare law in Britain to date. It provides a full analysis of the substantive law, considers its objectives, application and effectiveness, the background to the current debate and the arguments for and against further reform. It includes full coverage of key topics such as the law relating to agricultural production, transportation, scientific procedures, entertainment, domestic pets, wildlife, hunting and enforcement.
Since the Origin of Species was first published, Darwinism has been attacked for undermining traditional morality. In particular, because it emphasizes the kinship between humans and other animals, Darwinism seems incompatible with the traditional idea of human dignity - that human life has a special value, while other animals may be sacrificed for any purpose that humans choose. This book argues that Darwinism does undermine the traditional idea of human dignity; however, this is not a reason for rejecting Darwin's outlook. Instead, it is a reason for rejecting human dignity and replacing it with a better moral view, a more enlightened ethic regarding both the value of human life and our treatment of nonhuman animals. This important book, presenting Darwin's scientific and non-scientific views as one united theory, will stimulate all those interested in evolution, morality, religion, and animal rights to re-examine their views.
Morality's Progress is the summation of nearly three decades of work by a leading figure in environmental ethics and bioethics. The twenty-two papers here are invigoratingly diverse, but together tell a unified story about various aspects of the morality of our relationships to animals and to nature. Jamieson's direct and accessible essays will convince sceptics that thinking about these relations offers great intellectual reward, and his work here sets a challenging, controversial agenda for the future.
In this comprehensive updated introduction to animal ethics, Lori Gruen weaves together poignant and provocative case studies with discussions of ethical theory, urging readers to engage critically and reflect empathetically on our relationships with other animals. In clear and accessible language, Gruen discusses a range of issues central to human-animal relations and offers a reasoned new perspective on key debates in the field. She analyses and explains a range of theoretical positions and poses challenging questions that directly encourage readers to hone their ethical reasoning skills and to develop a defensible position about their own practices. Her book will be an invaluable resource for students in a wide range of disciplines including ethics, environmental studies, veterinary science, gender studies, and the emerging field of animal studies. The book is an engaging account of animal ethics for readers with no prior background in philosophy.
How can someone who condemns hunting, animal farming, and animal experimentation also favor legal abortion, which is the deliberate destruction of a human fetus? The authors of Beating Hearts aim to reconcile this apparent conflict and examine the surprisingly similar strategic and tactical questions faced by activists in the pro-life and animal rights movements. Beating Hearts maintains that sentience, or the ability to have subjective experiences, grounds a being’s entitlement to moral concern. The authors argue that nearly all human exploitation of animals is unjustified. Early abortions do not contradict the sentience principle because they precede fetal sentience, and Beating Hearts explains why the mere potential for sentience does not create moral entitlements. Late abortions do raise serious moral questions, but forcing a woman to carry a child to term is problematic as a form of gender-based exploitation. These ethical explorations lead to a wider discussion of the strategies deployed by the pro-life and animal rights movements. Should legal reforms precede or follow attitudinal changes? Do gory images win over or alienate supporters? Is violence ever principled? By probing the connections between debates about abortion and animal rights, Beating Hearts uses each highly contested set of questions to shed light on the other.
The Western world is currently gripped by an obsessive concern for the rights of animals - their uses and abuses. In this book, Leahy argues that this is a movement based upon a series of fundamental misconceptions about the basic nature of animals. This is a radical philosophical questioning of prevailing views on animal rights, which credit animals with a self-consciousness like ours. Leahy's conclusions have implications for issues such as bloodsports, meat eating and fur trading.
The controversial subject of this book is the permissible use of animals by humans. Lewis Petrinovich argues that humans have a set of cognitive abilities, developing from a suite of emotional attachments, that make them unique among species. Although other animals can think, suffer, and have needs, the interests of members of the human species should triumph over comparable interests of members of other species.
This book is the third in a trilogy concerned with the morality of various actions that affect the birth, life, and death of organisms. Using principles of moral philosophy, biology, evolutionary theory, neurophysiology, medicine, and cognitive science, Petrinovich discusses such topics as fetal and prenatal development, development of the mind and brain, animal liberation, morality and animal research, the eating of animals, keeping animals in zoos and as pets, and the importance of biodiversity. In the epilogue, he summarizes the main issues and discusses the moral principles governing their resolution.
Bradford Books imprint
First Published in 2003. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.
This book, written by leading academics and activists, examines the development of animal rights over the past two decades and asks where the issue goes from here. The contributions cover animal rights philosophy, strategies of the animal rights movement, the treatment of animals in specific contexts and the political arena within which animal advocates must operate. The unifying theme is provided by an emerging debate about the future direction of the animal protection movement, and, in particular, about the utility of using rights language as a means of achieving further progress.
Preface 1. On the Relative Unimportance of Human Interests 1.1. Setting the Stage 1.2. What Do We mean When We Say that Human Interests are More Significant than Animal Interests? 1.3. Does the Cosmos Inform Us that Human Interests are More Significant than Animal Interests? 1.4. Should Humans Consider Human Interests More Significant than Animal Interests? 2. On the Relative Unimportance of Human Life 2.1. Setting the Stage 2.2. The Disvalue of Death Argument 2.3. Why Your Death is Less Important than You Think 2.4. The Problem With Valuing Capacities 2.5. From Preservation to Creation 2.6. Mill's Argument Conclusion
Acknowledgements Animals and the Law: The Basics Anti-Cruelty Laws Animal Welfare Laws Animal Control and Management Laws Animals, the Constitution and the Private Law The Future: Animals as Subjects, An-All-Inclusive Legal Regime Notes and References Index
Unanswered questions about the precise psychological abilities of laboratory animals inevitably result in a degree of uncertainty about the nature and magnitude of the suffering likely to result from invasive procedures and protocols. It has been theorised that only those species with brain structures such as a cerebral cortex and thalamus and the capacity for synaptic feedback between the two have the capacity for sentience (Butler 2000). If true, this would include most vertebrates, with the possible exception of chondrichthyes (sharks and rays) and cyclostomes (lampreys and hagfish), but not invertebrates. Although many invertebrates display complex behaviour, there is little evidence of brain structures comparable to those believed to support consciousness in higher animals (Nicol 2010). Cephalopods, however, display electroencephalogram patterns (i.e. electrical activity or ‘brainwaves’) similar to those associated with differing wake-sleep states of consciousness in vertebrates (Edelman & Seth 2009), demonstrating their possible sentience, and also the limits of our understanding about what neuroanatomical mechanisms are necessary for sentience, and about which animals possess them, and to what degree.