Tres argumentos estándar contra el valor individual de los animales no-humanos

Telos: Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas 17 (1) (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Animal ethics has presented challenging questions regarding the human-animalrelationship. According to some philosophers, non-human animals have value inthemselves. This claim is most commonly based on sentience or consciousness inthe phenomenal sense: since it is like something to be an animal, animals cannotbe treated as mere biological matter. However, the claim has been met with criticism.This paper analyses three of the most common arguments against what ishere called the “individual value” of non-human animals. These arguments are thecapacity argument, the humanistic argument, and the special relations argument.It is maintained that they all face severe problems, which leave the door open forthe possibility that non-human animals may, indeed, have individual value

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-02

Downloads
38 (#409,607)

6 months
8 (#342,364)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Eating Meat and Eating People.Cora Diamond - 1978 - Philosophy 53 (206):465 - 479.
Do animals have beliefs?Stephen P. Stich - 1979 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 57 (1):15-28.
Eating Meat and Eating People.Cora Diamond & Kenan Professor - 2004 - In Cass R. Sunstein & Martha Craven Nussbaum (eds.), Animal rights: current debates and new directions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Interspecific justice.Donald VanDeVeer - 1979 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 22 (1-4):55 – 79.

View all 13 references / Add more references