The debate over whether human animals are linked by bonds of justice to nonhu-man animals is ancient and has been several times settled. The Roman jurists defined the j us naturae in terms of what nature had taught 'all animals', but Grotius and other natural-law theorists rejected this view and redefined the jus naturae as that which accorded with human nature, thereby founding the 'modern' view which has excluded nonhuman animals from the sphere of justice. This paper examines Grotius's argument (...) as part of a larger seventeenth-century 'counter-revolution' in thought and argues that its incoherence becomes intelligible only when viewed as an attempt to deal with the embarrassing phenomenon of inhumane warfare. Warned by the example of Grotius, we may wish to inquire to what extent any discussion of animal justice, whatever side it takes, may be an exercise in the perpetration of injustice. (shrink)

The classical roots of ecological sensibility lie not only in the ?theatre of reason? (Greek nature philosophy and natural history), but also in religious mythology. More important than the world seen as the ?theatre of the gods?, however, was the radically ecological view of death stated in mythic form by Empedocles and the Pythagoreans. The very emergence of the ?theatre of reason? marked a significant stage of man's alienation from nature (and from himself), though the struggle between rationalistic anthropocentrism and (...) a more ecological perspective reappeared within philosophy itself, so that the legacy of ?the Philosopher? is a dual one. (shrink)

(1975). On the human question, being the report of the Erewhonian high commission to evaluate technological society. Inquiry: Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 127-166.