Raising the Bar in the Justification of Animal Research

Journal of Animal Ethics 5 (1):5-19, (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Animal ethics committees (AECs) appeal to utilitarian principles in their justification of animal experiments. Although AECs do not grant rights to animals, they do accept that animals have moral standing and should not be unnecessarily harmed. Although many appeal to utilitarian arguments in the justification of animal experiments, I argue that AECs routinely fall short of the requirements needed for such justification in a variety of ways. I argue that taking the moral status of animals seriously—even if this falls short of granting rights to animals—should lead to a thorough revision or complete elimination of many of the current practices in animal experimentation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,020

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-03-19

Downloads
116 (#187,301)

6 months
13 (#282,665)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Elisa Galgut
University of Cape Town

References found in this work

“Our fellow creatures”.Jeff McMahan - 2005 - The Journal of Ethics 9 (3-4):353 - 380.
Are animal models predictive for humans?Niall Shanks, Ray Greek & Jean Greek - 2009 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4:2.
Brute Science: Dilemmas of Animal Experimentation.Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks - 1996 - Ethics and the Environment 4 (1):115-121.

Add more references