Animal rearing as a contract?

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (1):51-58 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Can animals, and especially cattle, be the subject ofmoral concern? Should we care about their well-being?Two competing ethical theories have addressed suchissues so far. A utilitarian theory which, inBentham's wake, extends moral consideration to everysentient being, and a theory of the rights orinterests of animals which follows Feinberg'sconceptions. This includes various positions rangingfrom the most radical (about animal liberation) tomore moderate ones (concerned with the well-being ofanimals). Notwithstanding their diversity, theseconceptions share some common flaws. First, as anextension of primarily anthropocentric theories (aboututility or rights) they still participate in the flawsof the original setting. Second, extending them tonon-human beings raises the problem of the borderwhich is to be drawn between what can be included inthe purview of moral consideration and what is leftoutside. Third, such theories are not able to distinguishbetween an ethics of wildlife and an ethics ofdomestic life, which too often leads to preposterousstatements. We would like to argue (i) that we should distinguishbetween environmental ethics (concerned withpopulations, species, biotic communities) and animalethics (where animals are taken into consideration individually);(ii) that individualist animal ethics are not relevantfor animal rearing; (iii) that animal rearing is a hierarchicalrelationship which rules are to be found in the fiction of a domesticcontract.Hence, we would like to construct a new conception ofthe ethics of the relation between men and the cattlethey breed based on the idea of a domestic contract.Our main assumption is Mary Midgleys's anthropologicalassumption, according to which human communities,since the Neolithic age, have always included variousanimals, so that relations of sociability have alwaysexisted between human beings and animals within thedomestic community (a mixed community). In order tospecify the hierarchical and non-egalitarian, butinclusive reciprocal obligations and relations insidesuch a community, we will elaborate on the notion ofa ``domestic contract'', an implicitly assumedidea traced back to Lucretius and whichwe will follow up to the physiocrats and Adam Smith.We will show that such an idea relies upon theassumption of communication between cattle farmer andanimals, of shared experience and exchanges betweenthe two parties. We will then show how modern factory,or battery animal farming, can be seen as unilaterallybreaking this domestic contract, forsaking ourduties towards domestic animals.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

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

On justifying the exploitation of animals in research.S. F. Sapontzis - 1988 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):177-196.
Animal Ethics: Toward an Ethics of Responsiveness.Kelly Oliver - 2010 - Research in Phenomenology 40 (2):267-280.
The ethical contract as a tool in organic animal husbandry.Vonne Lund, Raymond Anthony & Helena Röcklinsberg - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (1):23-49.
Live Free or Die. [REVIEW]Joel Marks - 2010 - Animal Law 17 (1):243-250.
Popular media and animals.Claire Molloy - 2011 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Animal rights: a philosophical defence.Mark Rowlands (ed.) - 1998 - New York: St. Martin's Press.
Animal Liberation.J. Baird Callicott - 1980 - Environmental Ethics 2 (4):311-338.
Animal rights: moral theory and practice.Mark Rowlands - 2009 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
39 (#356,630)

6 months
3 (#445,838)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The Relationship Between Workers and Animals in the Pork Industry: A Shared Suffering.Jocelyne Porcher - 2011 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (1):3-17.
The ethical contract as a tool in organic animal husbandry.Vonne Lund, Raymond Anthony & Helena Röcklinsberg - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (1):23-49.
Midgley at the intersection of animal and environmental ethics.Gregory Mcelwain - 2018 - Les Ateliers de l'Éthique / the Ethics Forum 13 (1):143-158.
“Würde der kreatur” and the common morality.Ben Mepham - 2000 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):65-78.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.Jeremy Bentham - 1780 - New York: Dover Publications. Edited by J. H. Burns & H. L. A. Hart.

Add more references