scholarly journals David DeGrazia o prawach zwierząt – analiza krytyczna

2020 ◽  
pp. 52-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Pełka
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Revolution ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Animal Minds ◽  
Famous People ◽  
Social Philosopher ◽  
Equal Consideration

The article aims to critically discuss the theory of animal rights developed by American social philosopher David DeGrazia. It consists of two parts. The first one describes the main elements of DeGrazia’s approach, namely his views on animal minds, the principle of equal consideration, the idea of unequal moral status, the concept of border persons, and practical remarks concerning improving the treatment of animals by humans. The second part presents remarks about the points where DeGrazia’s proposals should be supplemented and corrected so as to make them more convincing and widely accepted. The conclusion of the essay is the proposal of a cultural revolution for the benefit of animals, which should be initiated by famous people, like actresses, actors, sportswomen and sportsmen, because of their influential position in contemporary societies.

scholarly journals David DeGrazia on Animal Rights: A Critical Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Pełka
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Revolution ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Animal Minds ◽  
Famous People ◽  
Social Philosopher ◽  
Equal Consideration

The article aims to critically discuss the theory of animal rights developed by American social philosopher David DeGrazia. It consists of two parts. The first one describes the main elements of DeGrazia’s approach, namely his views on animal minds, the principle of equal consideration, the idea of unequal moral status, the concept of border persons, and practical remarks concerning improving the treatment of animals by humans. The second part presents remarks about the points where DeGrazia’s proposals should be supplemented and corrected so as to make them more convincing and widely accepted. The conclusion of the essay is the proposal of a cultural revolution for the benefit of animals, which should be initiated by famous people, like actresses, actors, sportswomen and sportsmen, because of their influential position in contemporary societies.

scholarly journals Animal Rights: A Philosophical Evaluation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (Issue 4) ◽  
pp. 119-124
Author(s):  
Innocent Sanga
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Philosophical Debate ◽  
Contemporary World ◽  
General Overview ◽  
Christian Perspective

Animal right is one of the most controversial issues in the contemporary world. A number of scholars have been discussing on whether the animals have rights like human beings or not. Through this debate, their opinions can be put into three groups; those who deny animal moral status, those who give some moral considerations to animals but deny them a fuller moral status, and those who extend rights to animals. This paper then gives a general overview on ‘Do Animals have Rights?’ It gives the meaning of the term “right” and explains whether the term right applies to animals too. It also portrays a drama whereby animals complain against sufferings imposed on them by human beings and a response given by a human being. It is also followed by philosophical debate on animal rights: pro and cons arguments. The Christian perspective is not left out. Finally, the paper ends with critical evaluations and conclusion. In evaluation of the debate on animal rights, the study found that, animals deserve to be treated well based on the argument that they have rights as animals. The main recommendation is that human beings should change their perception concerning animals by respecting animal.

Animals in Political Theory

2015 ◽  
pp. 42-64
Author(s):  
Sue Donaldson ◽  
Will Kymlicka
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
Human Animal ◽  
Animal Question ◽  
Blind Spots

Western political theorists have largely ignored the animal question, assuming that animals have no place in our theories of democracy, citizenship, membership, sovereignty, and the public good. Conversely, animal ethicists have largely ignored political theory, assuming that we can theorize the moral status and moral rights of animals without drawing on the categories and concepts of political theory. This chapter traces the history of this separation between animals and political theory, examines the resulting intellectual blind spots for animal ethics, and reviews recent attempts to bring the two together. Situating animal rights within political theory has the potential to identify new models of justice in human-animal relations, and to open up new areas of scholarship and research.

Animal Minds and Neuroimaging

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
TOM BULLER
Keyword(s):  
Moral Status ◽  
Minimally Conscious State ◽  
Conscious State ◽  
Animal Minds ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Minimally Conscious

Abstract:As Colin Allen has argued, discussions between science and ethics about the mentality and moral status of nonhuman animals often stall on account of the fact that the properties that ethics presents as evidence of animal mentality and moral status, namely consciousness and sentience, are not observable “scientifically respectable” properties. In order to further discussion between science and ethics, it seems, therefore, that we need to identify properties that would satisfy both domains.In this article I examine the mentality and moral status of nonhuman animals from the perspective of neuroethics. By adopting this perspective, we can see how advances in neuroimaging regarding (1) research into the neurobiology of pain, (2) “brain reading,” and (3) the minimally conscious state may enable us to identify properties that help bridge the gap between science and ethics, and hence help further the debate about the mentality and moral status of nonhuman animals.

How the Moral Community Evolves

2021 ◽  
pp. 231-249
Author(s):  
Rachell Powell ◽  
Irina Mikhalevich ◽  
Allen Buchanan
Keyword(s):  
Moral Status ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Moral Community ◽  
Moral Standing ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Moral Progress ◽  
Animal Minds ◽  
Attitudes And Behaviors ◽  
Adaptive Mechanisms ◽  
Moral Attitudes

Moral reasoning is modulated by emotions and other cognitive biases. How do these covert biasing mechanisms shape perceptions of more fundamental moral categories, such as moral standing and moral status (together, “MSS”), out of which specific moral attitudes and behaviors flow? This chapter explains the centrality of MSS to human evolution, and examines several evolved biases that distort MSS ascription. These include tendencies to deny moral standing, or to attribute lower moral status, to beings that elicit feelings of disgust or fear, as well as to those that are perceived as less similar, less attractive, less individualized, and less disposed toward reciprocal cooperation. These adaptive mechanisms may have served human groups well in the evolutionary past, but in the modern world they pose an obstacle to moral progress and play a key role in moral regression. The chapter argues that these biases have also influenced philosophical and scientific research on animal minds. The aim is to develop a richer, biocultural understanding of how conceptions of the moral community evolve.

Equal Consideration and Animal Rights

1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 87-88
Author(s):  
Gary E. Jones ◽  
Clifton Perry ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Equal Consideration

ANIMALS, MORAL STATUS, AND THE OBJECTIVES OF MORALITY

Think ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (47) ◽  
pp. 33-43
Author(s):  
Ronald A. Lindsay
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Moral Consideration

Many philosophers maintain that a being's moral status depends on its capacities, for example, whether the being is rational or sentient. In the notorious ‘argument from marginal cases’, animal rights advocates make use of this received view by arguing that because infants and the severely cognitively disabled have no more capacities than many animals, animals have status equivalent to humans and are entitled to equal moral consideration. But although capacities may be relevant to moral status, they do not determine it. Ultimately, we need to consider the objectives of morality in determining what obligations we have towards any group of beings, whether they are aliens, humans, or animals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document