Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Nonculpably Ignorant Meat Eaters & Epistemically Unjust Meat Producers, C.E. Abbate Dr.
Nonculpably Ignorant Meat Eaters & Epistemically Unjust Meat Producers, C.E. Abbate Dr.
Philosophy Faculty Research
In the United States (U.S.) alone, nearly 10 billion farmed animals are raised and killed for food each year, and approximately 99% of these animals are raised in factory farms, where they are mutilated without anesthetic, confined to cramped and overcrowded cages and sheds, forcibly separated at birth from their mothers, deprived of the opportunity to move freely and engage in species-specific behavior, and killed violently (Sentience Institute 2019). Given the terrible harms that billions of animals endure on U.S. factory farms each year, we must ask: why do so many people repeatedly partake in and support such a morally …
Meat Eating And Moral Responsibility: Exploring The Moral Distinctions Between Meat Eaters And Puppy Torturers, C.E. Abbate
Meat Eating And Moral Responsibility: Exploring The Moral Distinctions Between Meat Eaters And Puppy Torturers, C.E. Abbate
Philosophy Faculty Research
In his influential article on the ethics of eating animals, Alastair Norcross argues that consumers of factory raised meat and puppy torturers are equally condemnable because both knowingly cause serious harm to sentient creatures just for trivial pleasures. Against this claim, I argue that those who buy and consume factory raised meat, even those who do so knowing that they cause harm, have a partial excuse for their wrongdoings. Meat eaters act under social duress, which causes volitional impairment, and they often act from deeply ingrained habits, which causes epistemic impairment. But puppy torturers act against cultural norms and …
Don’T Demean “Invasives”: Conservation And Wrongful Species Discrimination, C. E. Abbate, Bob Fischer
Don’T Demean “Invasives”: Conservation And Wrongful Species Discrimination, C. E. Abbate, Bob Fischer
Philosophy Faculty Research
It is common for conservationists to refer to non-native species that have undesirable impacts on humans as “invasive”. We argue that the classification of any species as “invasive” constitutes wrongful discrimination. Moreover, we argue that its being wrong to categorize a species as invasive is perfectly compatible with it being morally permissible to kill animals—assuming that conservationists “kill equally”. It simply is not compatible with the double standard that conservationists tend to employ in their decisions about who lives and who dies.
A Defense Of Free-Roaming Cats From A Hedonist Account Of Feline Well-Being, C. E. Abbate
A Defense Of Free-Roaming Cats From A Hedonist Account Of Feline Well-Being, C. E. Abbate
Philosophy Faculty Research
There is a widespread belief that for their own safety and for the protection of wildlife, cats should be permanently kept indoors. Against this view, I argue that cat guardians have a duty to provide their feline companions with outdoor access. The argument is based on a sophisticated hedonistic account of animal well-being that acknowledges that the performance of species-normal ethological behavior is especially pleasurable. Territorial behavior, which requires outdoor access, is a feline-normal ethological behavior, so when a cat is permanently confined to the indoors, her ability to flourish is impaired. Since cat guardians have a duty not to …
Economic Reasoning And Fallacy Of Composition: Pursuing A Woods-Walton Thesis, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Economic Reasoning And Fallacy Of Composition: Pursuing A Woods-Walton Thesis, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Philosophy Faculty Research
Woods and Walton deserve credit for including (in all editions of their textbook Argument) a discussion of “economic reasoning” and its susceptibility to the “fallacy of composition.” Unfortunately, they did not sufficiently pursue the topic, and argumentation scholars have apparently ignored their pioneering effort. Yet, obviously, economic argumentation is extremely important, and economists constantly harp on this fallacy. This paper calls attention to this problem, elaborating my own approach, which is empirical, historical, and meta-argumentational.
Commentary On: John Fields’S “Objectivity, Autonomy, And The Use Of Arguments From Authority”, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Commentary On: John Fields’S “Objectivity, Autonomy, And The Use Of Arguments From Authority”, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Philosophy Faculty Research
No abstract provided.
A Para-Clerical Approach To The Galileo Affair And To Science Vs. Religion, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
A Para-Clerical Approach To The Galileo Affair And To Science Vs. Religion, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Philosophy Faculty Research
In 1633, the Inquisition condemned Galileo for defending Copernicus’s hypothesis of the earth’s motion and denying the scientific authority of Scripture. This ended the original controversy, but generated a new one that continues today, for example, about whether the condemnation proves the incompatibility between science and religion. Recently the Galileo affair has been studied by several scholars whom I label “Berkeley para-clericals,” chiefly philosopher Paul Feyerabend and historian John Heilbron. Their approach is distinctive: it views controversial topics involving the relationship between science and religion from a perspective that is secular-minded, but appreciative of religion, and yet conducted in the …
The Roman Inquisition: Trying Galileo, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
The Roman Inquisition: Trying Galileo, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Philosophy Faculty Research
No abstract provided.