Unnecessary Suffering

Environmental Ethics 30 (1):51-67 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The philosophical literature on the ethical treatment of animals is largely divided between two distinct kinds of approaches: (1) the rights-based approach; and (2) the utilitarian approach. A third approach to the debate is possible. The general moral principle “It is wrong to cause unnecessary pain or suffering” is sufficient to render many human activities involving nonhuman animals morally wrong, provided an appropriate account of unnecessary is developed to give the principle its force. The moral principle can be easily applied to several general areas of human activity: food, research, and entertainment

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

Vegetarianism, Traditional Morality, and Moral Conservatism.David Detmer - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (9999):39-48.
Suffering injustice: Misrecognition as moral injury in critical theory.J. M. Bernstein - 2005 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (3):303 – 324.
Harm in the Wild: Facing Non-Human Suffering in Nature. [REVIEW]Beril İdemen Sözmen - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1075-1088.
Cruelty, Kindness, and Unnecessary Suffering.Tom Regan - 1980 - Philosophy 55 (214):532 - 541.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
39 (#399,999)

6 months
4 (#800,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jill Dieterle
Eastern Michigan University

Citations of this work

The Emergence of Food Ethics.Paul B. Thompson - 2016 - Food Ethics 1 (1):61-74.
The Ethics of Poisoning Foxes.Thomas Battersby - 2008 - Emergent Australasian Philosophers 1 (1).

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references