Animal rights v animal research: a modest proposal

Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (5):300-303 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The practical problem of assuaging the opponents of animal research may be solved without formally addressing (or resolving) the underlying ethical questions of the debate. Specifically, a peaceful boycott of the "fruits" of animal research may lead to a wider cessation of such research, than, say, vocal or even violent protest. To assist those who might wish to participate in such a boycott- and, moreover, to critically inform them of the implications of their actions-1 offer a modest proposal: the use of an "animal research advance directive", a form which enumerates precisely which "fruits of research" are declined

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

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

Animal rights: moral theory and practice.Mark Rowlands - 2009 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Animal rights: what everyone needs to know.Paul Waldau - 2011 - New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
Animal rights.Shasta Gaughen (ed.) - 2005 - San Diego: Greenhaven Press.
Animal rights and wrongs.Roger Scruton - 2000 - London: Metro in association with Demos.
Animal rights: a very short introduction.David DeGrazia (ed.) - 2002 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Animal welfare and animal rights.L. W. Sumner - 1988 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):159-175.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
213 (#90,260)

6 months
8 (#292,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jay Bernstein
The New School

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references