Animal Rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14394/etyka.614Abstract
The views of Peter Singer, and various authors in the Singer and Regan anthology Animal Rights and Human Obligations, are explored. Their case against „speciesism”, that only members of the human species are eligible for moral considerations, is accepted, but the further inference that a1nimałs have strong rights, especially not to be killed for food, is questioned. Utilitarianism would, for example, seem to have room for the eating of animals, though rather precariously. However, the general view of morality which is argued to make best sense of our inclination to think that eating animals is permissible is a contractarian/egoist one. This makes it obvious that we have no obligations to animals, since we need incur none (and can’t anyway, owing to lack of communication); at the same time it
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Works published in ETYKA are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0), which entails acknowledgement of authorship. Under this licence, Authors keep their copyrights and agree that their works can be used again legally for any purpose, including commercial ones, without the need to obtain previous consent of the Author or publisher. The articles can be downloaded, printed, copied and disseminated; under the condition that the authorship is indicated accordingly, together with the place of original publication. The Authors preserve their copyrights to the above-mentioned works without any limitation whatsoever.
