7 found
Order:
  1. Ethical Extensionism Defended.Joel MacClellan - 2024 - Between the Species 27 (1):140-178.
    Ethical extensionism is a common argument pattern in environmental and animal ethics, which takes a morally valuable trait already recognized in us and argues that we should recognize that value in other entities such as nonhuman animals. I exposit ethical extensionism’s core argument, argue for its validity and soundness, and trace its history to 18th century progressivist calls to expand the moral community and legal franchise. However, ethical extensionism has its critics. The bulk of the paper responds to recent criticisms, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  43
    Is Biocentrism Dead? Two Live Problems for Life-Centered Ethics.Joel MacClellan - forthcoming - Journal of Value Inquiry:1-22.
    Biocentrism, a prominent view in environmental ethics, is the notion that all and only individual biological organisms have moral status, which is to say that their good ought to be considered for its own sake by moral agents. I argue that biocentrism suffers two serious problems: the Origin Problem and the Normativity Problem. Biocentrism seeks to avoid the absurdity that artifacts have moral status on the basis that organisms have naturalistic origins whereas artifacts do not. The Origin Problem contends that, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. How (Not) To Defend A Rawlsian Approach To Intergenerational Ethics.Joel Macclellan - 2013 - Ethics and the Environment 18 (1):67-85.
    John Rawls’ account of our obligations towards future generations has received considerable criticism in the environmental ethics literature relative to the scant few passages in which he discusses the issue. I argue that much of this criticism is warranted because Rawls’ Heads of Family strategy for grounding obligations to future generations is not only independently problematic, but also inconsistent with his general framework. Furthermore, the oft-suggested Time Travel strategy will not work either, and for just those reasons which Rawls gave. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4.  47
    Size Matters: Animal Size, Contributory Causation, and Ethical Vegetarianism.Joel MacClellan - 2013 - Journal of Animal Ethics 3 (1):57-68.
    Animal size is a relevant and unappreciated consideration in moral evaluations of killing animals for food, especially for utilitarians, who must weigh the gustatory satisfaction of eating meat-the quantity of which varies greatly throughout the animal kingdom-against animal suffering in utilitarian calculations. I argue that animal size can drastically alter not only the extent but even the valence of such calculations. Then I show how the business ethics literature on vegetarianism is deficient for not taking animal size into account. Last, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5.  63
    More Ethics Than Politics, More Animals Than Species.Joel MacClellan - 2016 - Humanimalia 8 (1):120-30.
  6.  3
    Another Dam Controversy: The Case of the Cuyahoga from World’s Most Toxic River to EPA Posterchild.Joel MacClellan - 2022 - In Ian Smith & Matt Ferkany (eds.), Environmental Ethics in the Midwest: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Michigan State University Press. pp. 167-202.
    The Cuyahoga River is a small Ohio river with an outsized influence in U.S. environmental history. The 1969 river fire ignited the public imagination, galvanized the environmental movement, and spurred the creation of the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Clean Water Act. Water quality has since improved markedly, yet several controversial dams continue to obstruct the Cuyahoga’s flow, reducing environmental quality. The U.S. and Ohio EPAs recently announced plans to remove all such dams by 2023. In this paper, I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  79
    "What the Wild Things are: A Critique on Clare Palmer's" What Do We Owe Animals?".Joel MacClellan - 2013 - Between the Species 16 (1):6.
    This paper critiques Clare Palmer’s “What do we owe wild animals?” on three grounds. First, it is argued that, Palmer’s opening case study notwithstanding, there are good empirical reasons to think that we should assist domesticated horses and not wild deer. Then, Palmer’s claim that “wildness is not a capacity” is brought into question, and it is argued that wildness connotes certain capacities which wild animals generally have and which domesticated animals generally lack. Lastly, the “supererogation problem” is developed against (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark