Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Philosophy
Extending The Impairment Argument To Sentient Non-Human Animals, Christopher A. Bobier
Extending The Impairment Argument To Sentient Non-Human Animals, Christopher A. Bobier
Between the Species
I defend a new argument against raising and killing sentient non-human animals for food: It is immoral to non-lethally impair sentient non-human animals for pleasure, and since raising and killing sentient animals for gustatory pleasure impairs them to a much greater degree, that also is immoral. This argument is structurally analogous to Perry Hendricks’s impairment argument for the immorality of abortion. Proponents of the anti-abortion argument have to be, on grounds of moral consistency, proponents of the anti-meat eating argument: the very same considerations they appeal to to justify their anti-abortion impairment argument apply to the impairment argument against raising …
Colb And Dorf On Abortion And Animal Rights, Mylan Engel Jr.
Colb And Dorf On Abortion And Animal Rights, Mylan Engel Jr.
Between the Species
In their recent book, Sherry Colb and Michael Dorf defend the following ethical theses: (1) sentience is sufficient for possessing the right not to be harmed and the right not to be killed; (2) killing sentient animals for food is almost always seriously wrong; (3) aborting pre-sentient fetuses raises no moral concerns at all; and (4) aborting sentient fetuses is wrong absent a reason weighty enough to justify killing the fetus. They also discuss strategies and tactics for activists: They oppose the use of graphic images by activists on tactical grounds, and they categorically oppose the use of violence by …