Acta Analytica 36 (3):451-463 (2021)

Authors
Cheryl (C.E.) Abbate
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Abstract
In response to my defense of house-based, free-roaming cats, Bob Fischer : 463–468, 2020) argues that cat guardians have a duty to permanently confine their felines to the indoors. His main argument is that house-based cats cause an all-things-considered harm to the animals they kill and that this harm is not outweighed by the harm cats endure as a consequence of feline imprisonment. He moreover claims that while we can justify the restriction of feline liberty because cats are not “full agents” and are under our care, we cannot justify restricting the liberty of “full agents” who are not under our care. Against Fischer, I argue that even if cats cause an all-things-considered harm to wildlife, the harm of permanent confinement is a greater harm. Moreover, I challenge Fischer’s claim that cats are not full agents and his claim that we can justify permanently confining creatures under our care. Thus, as I previously argued, cat guardians have a duty to, under certain conditions, provide outdoor access to their felines.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s12136-020-00457-7
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,489
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1983 - University of California Press, C1983.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan & Mary Midgley - 1986 - The Personalist Forum 2 (1):67-71.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Human Studies 8 (4):389-392.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Keep Your Cats Indoors: a Reply to Abbate.Bob Fischer - 2020 - Acta Analytica 35 (3):463-468.
Keep Your Cats Indoors: A Reply to Abbate.Bob Fischer - 2020 - Acta Analytica 35 (3):463-468.
Save the Meat for Cats: Why It’s Wrong to Eat Roadkill.Cheryl Abbate & C. E. Abbate - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (1):165-182.
Could Cats Turn Out to Be Robots?Jonathan Michael Wilwerding - 1990 - Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles
For Their Own Good: Captive Cats and Routine Confinement.Clare Palmer & Peter Sandoe - 2014 - In Lori Gruen (ed.), Ethics of Captivity. Oxford University Press. pp. 135-155.
Intentionality.Alex Byrne - 2006 - In J. Pfeifer & Sahotra Sarkar (eds.), The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia. Routledge.
The Harm Principle.Nils Holtug - 2002 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.
J. S. Mill's Re-Conceptualization of Liberty.Robert Allen Garmong - 2002 - Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-01-13

Total views
24 ( #476,297 of 2,520,807 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,509 of 2,520,807 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes