Is there a solution to the moral dilemma between animal consciousness and human survival?

Abstract

On April 19, 2024, the New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness was announced at the “Emerging Science of Animal Consciousness” conference held at New York University. The New York Declaration is an effort to showcase a scientific consensus on the presence of conscious experiences across all vertebrates (including reptiles, amphibians, and fish) and many invertebrates (at least including cephalopods, decapod crustaceans, and insects). Scientifically, the New York Declaration marks a significant advancement for humanity. However, it also brings heightened awareness to the moral challenges associated with animals that have conscious experiences (or phenomenal consciousness). This article will discuss philosophical approaches to the moral issue of killing sentient beings, thereby highlighting an existing moral dilemma in human society: In sustaining human survival, a species considered to have morality, we have to violate our own moral standards by killing other species with intrinsic value, consciousness, or sentience. This moral dilemma has long been present in human society. Various solutions have been proposed and implemented in practice to address this issue, such as the non-violence and vegetarian approach of Buddhism, the application of Islamic law and sacred rituals to animals in Islam, animal rights movements and voluntary extinction in Western countries, and the technology producing meat using animal cells. However, despite these approaches, we have not yet been able to fully resolve the dilemma, as sentient beings continue to be killed for our survival. We believe the most feasible solution is to change the current food consumption culture, build an eco-surplus culture to mitigate climate change, prevent deforestation, and promote peace.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Assessing tests of animal consciousness.Leonard Dung - 2022 - Consciousness and Cognition 105 (C):103410.
There is an epistemic problem in animal consciousness research.Aida Roige - 2023 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1.
Mají zvířata vědomí?Tomas Hribek - 2016 - Filosoficky Casopis 64 (1):3-22.
Animal consciousness and phenomenal concepts.Jenny Hung - 2023 - Philosophical Psychology 36 (3):580-600.
A Novel Theory of Consciousness.Petros A. M. Gelepithis - 2014 - International Journal of Machine Consciousness 6 (2):125-139.
Global Workspace Theory and Animal Consciousness.Jonathan Birch - 2020 - Philosophical Topics 48 (1):21-37.
Climate Change and Animal Ethics.Simone Pollo - 2023 - In Pellegrino Gianfranco & Marcello Di Paola (eds.), Handbook of Philosophy of Climate Change. Springer Nature. pp. 885-897.
Suffering without subjectivity.Peter Carruthers - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 121 (2):99-125.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-04-29

Downloads
93 (#184,608)

6 months
93 (#48,842)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Minh-Hoang Nguyen
Phenikaa University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.
The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. A summary.Arne Naess - 1973 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 16 (1-4):95 – 100.
Buddhism and Animal Ethics.Bronwyn Finnigan - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (7):1-12.
The Deep Ecology Movement: A Review.George Sessions - 1987 - Environmental Review: Er 11 (2):105-125.

View all 6 references / Add more references