79 found
Order:
See also
Nathan Nobis
Morehouse College
  1. A Moral Argument for Veganism.Daniel Hooley & Nathan Nobis - 2016 - In Andrew Chignell, Matthew Halteman & Terence Cuneo (eds.), Philosophy Comes to Dinner: Arguments on the Ethics of Eating.
    We offer a relatively simple and straightforward argument that each of us ought to be vegan. We don’t defend this position by appealing to ‘animal rights’ or the view that animals and humans are ‘moral equals’. Rather, we argue that animal agriculture causes serious harms to other animals (such as pain, suffering and death) and these harms are morally unjustified or caused for no good reason. This is true for both ‘factory farming’ and smaller, so-called ‘humane’ farms. We argue that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2. Chimpanzee Rights: The Philosophers' Brief.Kristin Andrews, Gary Comstock, G. K. D. Crozier, Sue Donaldson, Andrew Fenton, Tyler John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert Jones, Will Kymlicka, Letitia Meynell, Nathan Nobis, David M. Pena-Guzman & Jeff Sebo - 2018 - London: Routledge.
    In December 2013, the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) filed a petition for a common law writ of habeas corpus in the New York State Supreme Court on behalf of Tommy, a chimpanzee living alone in a cage in a shed in rural New York (Barlow, 2017). Under animal welfare laws, Tommy’s owners, the Laverys, were doing nothing illegal by keeping him in those conditions. Nonetheless, the NhRP argued that given the cognitive, social, and emotional capacities of chimpanzees, Tommy’s confinement constituted (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  3. Vegetarianism and Virtue: Does Consequentialism Demand Too Little?Nathan Nobis - 2002 - Social Theory and Practice 28 (1):135-156.
    "Nobis argues that Singer's consequentialist approach is inadequate for defending the moral obligation to become a vegetarian or vegan. The consequentialist case rests on the idea that being a vegetarian or vegan maximizes utility -- the fewer animals that are raised and killed for food, the less suffering. Nobis argues that this argument does not work on an individual level -- my becoming a vegetarian makes no difference to the overall utility of reducing animal suffering in a context of a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  4. Carl Cohen's 'Kind' Arguments for Animal Rights and Against Human Rights.Nathan Nobis - 2004 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (1):43–59.
    Carl Cohen's arguments against animal rights are shown to be unsound. His strategy entails that animals have rights, that humans do not, the negations of those conclusions, and other false and inconsistent implications. His main premise seems to imply that one can fail all tests and assignments in a class and yet easily pass if one's peers are passing and that one can become a convicted criminal merely by setting foot in a prison. However, since his moral principles imply that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  5. Xenotransplantation, Subsistence Hunting and the Pursuit of Health: Lessons for Animal Rights-Based Vegan Advocacy.Nathan Nobis - 2018 - Between the Species 21 (1).
    I argue that, contrary to what Tom Regan suggests, his rights view implies that subsistence hunting is wrong, that is, killing animals for food is wrong even when they are the only available food source, since doing so violates animal rights. We can see that subsistence hunting is wrong on the rights view by seeing why animal experimentation, specifically xenotransplanation, is wrong on the rights view: if it’s wrong to kill an animal to take organs to save a human life, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Do Zoos and Aquariums Promote Attitude Change in Visitors? A Critical Evaluation of the American Zoo and Aquarium Study.Randy Malamud, Lori Marino, Nathan Nobis, Ron Broglio & Scott O. Lilienfeld - 2010 - Society and Animals 18 (2):126-138.
    Modern-day zoos and aquariums market themselves as places of education and conservation. A recent study conducted by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association is being widely heralded as the first direct evidence that visits to zoos and aquariums produce long-term positive effects on people’s attitudes toward other animals. In this paper, we address whether this conclusion is warranted by analyzing the study’s methodological soundness. We conclude that Falk et al. contains at least six major threats to methodological validity that undermine (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  7. Moral Experts, Deference & Disagreement.Jonathan Matheson, Nathan Nobis & Scott McElreath - 2018 - In Nathan Nobis, Scott McElreath & Jonathan Matheson (eds.), Moral Expertise. Springer Verlag.
    We sometimes seek expert guidance when we don’t know what to think or do about a problem. In challenging cases concerning medical ethics, we may seek a clinical ethics consultation for guidance. The assumption is that the bioethicist, as an expert on ethical issues, has knowledge and skills that can help us better think about the problem and improve our understanding of what to do regarding the issue. The widespread practice of ethics consultations raises these questions and more: -/- • (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource, Collected and Edited by Noah Levin.Noah Levin, Nathan Nobis, David Svolba, Brandon Wooldridge, Kristina Grob, Eduardo Salazar, Benjamin Davies, Jonathan Spelman, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Kristin Seemuth Whaley, Jan F. Jacko & Prabhpal Singh (eds.) - 2019 - Huntington Beach, California: N.G.E Far Press.
    Collected and edited by Noah Levin -/- Table of Contents: -/- UNIT ONE: INTRODUCTION TO CONTEMPORARY ETHICS: TECHNOLOGY, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, AND IMMIGRATION 1 The “Trolley Problem” and Self-Driving Cars: Your Car’s Moral Settings (Noah Levin) 2 What is Ethics and What Makes Something a Problem for Morality? (David Svolba) 3 Letter from the Birmingham City Jail (Martin Luther King, Jr) 4 A Defense of Affirmative Action (Noah Levin) 5 The Moral Issues of Immigration (B.M. Wooldridge) 6 The Ethics of our (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9. Thinking Critically About Abortion: Why Most Abortions Aren’T Wrong & Why All Abortions Should Be Legal.Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2019 - Atlanta, GA: Open Philosophy Press.
    This book introduces readers to the many arguments and controversies concerning abortion. While it argues for ethical and legal positions on the issues, it focuses on how to think about the issues, not just what to think about them. It is an ideal resource to improve your understanding of what people think, why they think that and whether their (and your) arguments are good or bad, and why. It's ideal for classroom use, discussion groups, organizational learning, and personal reading. -/- (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10.  67
    The Philosophers' Brief in Support of Happy's Appeal.Gary Comstock, Sue Donaldson, Andrew Fenton, Tyler M. John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert C. Jones, Will Kymlicka, Letitia M. Meynell, Nathan Nobis, David M. Peña-Guzmán, James Rocha, Bernard Rollin, Jeff Sebo & Adam Shriver - 2021 - New York State Appellate Court.
    We submit this brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project’s efforts to secure habeas corpus relief for the elephant named Happy. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, declined to grant habeas corpus relief and order Happy’s transfer to an elephant sanctuary, relying, in part, on previous decisions that denied habeas relief for the NhRP’s chimpanzee clients, Kiko and Tommy. Those decisions use incompatible conceptions of ‘person’ which, when properly understood, are either philosophically inadequate or, in fact, compatible with Happy’s personhood.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. Rational Engagement, Emotional Response and the Prospects for Progress in Animal Use ‘Debates’.Nathan Nobis - 2013
    This paper is designed to help people rationally engage moral issues regarding the treatment of animals, specifically uses of animals in medical and psychological experimentation, basic research, drug development, education and training, consumer product testing and other areas.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  12. Reasonable Humans and Animals: An Argument for Vegetarianism.Nathan Nobis - 2008 - Between the Species 13 (8):4.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  13.  60
    College Vaccination Mandates Do Not Violate Medical Ethics.Nathan Nobis - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics Blog.
    As a medical ethicist, I want to explain why college vaccination requirements decidedly do not violate the core principles of medical ethics which include avoiding or lessening harms, promoting benefits, respecting people and their informed and free choices, and promoting justice and fairness. In particular, vaccine requirements do not violate the respect-related requirement to not selfishly “use” and abuse others as “means” for someone else’s benefit. Since false claims on important issues often have dire consequences, it’s important to explain why (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  70
    The Ethics of Belief: It’s Not Just Trump Supporters Who Believe Wrongly—It’s All of Us.Nathan Nobis - 2021 - Political Animal Magazine.
    An introduction of the ethics of belief and application to current political debates, with the observation that people of all political persuasions have beliefs that are not based on strong evidence.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Review of SHERRY F. COLB AND MICHAEL C. DORF Beating Hearts: Abortion and Animal Rights. [REVIEW]Nathan Nobis - 2016 - Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 1 (1):1-2.
    In this book, law professors Sherry F. Colb and Michael C. Dorf argue that: -/- many non-human animals, at least vertebrates, are morally considerable and prima facie wrong to harm because they are sentient, i.e., conscious and capable of experiencing pains and pleasures; most aborted human fetuses are not sentient -- their brains and nervous systems are not yet developed enough for sentience -- and so the motivating moral concern for animals doesn't apply to most abortions[2]; later abortions affecting sentient (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16.  21
    The Ethics of Animal Research: A Survey of Pediatric Health Care Workers.Ari R. Joffe, Meredith Bara, Natalie Anton & Nathan Nobis - 2014 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 9:20.
    Pediatric health care workers often perform, promote, and advocate use of public funds for animal research . We aim to determine whether HCW consider common arguments in support of AR convincing.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  17. "Common Arguments About Abortion" and "Better (Philosophical) Arguments About Abortion".Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2019 - Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource.
    Two chapters -- "Common Arguments about Abortion" and "Better (Philosophical) Arguments About Abortion" -- in one file, from the open access textbook "Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource" edited by Noah Levin. -/- Adults, children and babies are arguably wrong to kill, fundamentally, because we are conscious, aware and have feelings. Since early fetuses entirely lack these characteristics, we argue that they are not inherently wrong to kill and so most abortions are not morally wrong, since most abortions are (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Ethical Egoism.Nathan Nobis - 2020 - 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology.
    Selfishness is often considered a vice and selfish actions are often judged to be wrong. But sometimes we ought to do what’s best for ourselves: in a sense, we sometimes should be selfish. -/- The ethical theory known as ethical egoism states that we are always morally required to do what’s in our own self-interest. The view isn’t that we are selfish—this is psychological egoism—but that we ought to be. -/- This essay explores ethical egoism and the main arguments for (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Putting Humans First? [REVIEW]Nathan Nobis - 2006 - Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 8 (1):85 - 104.
    In Putting Humans First: Why We Are Natures Favorite, Tibor Machan argues against moral perspectives that require taking animals' interests seriously. He attempts to defend the status quo regarding routine, harmful uses of animals for food, fashion and experimentation. Graham and Nobis argue that Machan's work fails to resist pro-animal moral conclusions that are supported by a wide range of contemporary ethical arguments.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20.  81
    Review of Tom L. Beauchamp and David DeGrazia PRINCIPLES OF ANIMAL RESEARCH ETHICS. [REVIEW]Nathan Nobis - forthcoming - Bioethics.
    . . Tom Beauchamp and David DeGrazia's principles do improve upon the 3Rs which don’t mention the need for benefits from animal experimentation, the need to compare these benefits to animal harms, and provide no hard limits on experimentation. -/- However, they present their principles as “useful” for people engaged in animal research and as a “philosophically sound” (p. 4) framework for a new ethic for animal research. Regrettably, I have doubts about both these overall claims and so am pessimistic (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Common Arguments About Abortion.Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2019 - Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource.
    An introductory chapter on abortion that (1) reviews some common DEFINITIONS of abortion and argues that one definition is better than the others, (2) reviews and critiques some common QUESTION-BEGGING ARGUMENTS, on both sides of the issue, that have premises that merely assume the conclusion they are intended to support and (3) reviews and critiques many "EVERYDAY ARGUMENTS" on abortion, that is arguments that people without strong philosophical backgrounds give every day on the issues yet are poor good arguments. This (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. Euthanasia, or Mercy Killing.Nathan Nobis - 2019 - 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology.
    Sadly, there are people in very bad medical conditions who want to die. They are in pain, they are suffering, and they no longer find their quality of life to be at an acceptable level anymore. -/- When people like this are kept alive by machines or other medical treatments, can it be morally permissible to let them die? -/- Advocates of “passive euthanasia” argue that it can be. Their reasons, however, suggest that it can sometimes be not wrong to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Is Your Opinion on Abortion Wrong? Critical Thinking & Abortion.Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2020 - Science and Philosophy.
    For the past few years in the United States, almost daily there’s a headline about new proposed abortions restrictions. Conservatives cheer, liberals despair. But who is right here? Should abortion be generally legal or should it be banned? Is it usually immoral or is it usually not wrong at all? These same questions, of course, are asked in other countries. To many people, answers to these questions seem obvious, and people with different or contrary answers are, well, just wrong. But (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. The Philosophers' Brief on Chimpanzee Personhood.Kristin Andrews, Gary Comstock, Gillian Crozier, Sue Donaldson, Andrew Fenton, Tyler John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert Jones, Will Kymlicka, Letitia Meynell, Nathan Nobis, David Pena-Guzman, James Rocha, Bernard Rollin, Jeff Sebo, Adam Shriver & Rebecca Walker - 2018 - Proposed Brief by Amici Curiae Philosophers in Support of the Petitioner-Appelllant Court of Appeals, State of New York,.
    In this brief, we argue that there is a diversity of ways in which humans (Homo sapiens) are ‘persons’ and there are no non-arbitrary conceptions of ‘personhood’ that can include all humans and exclude all nonhuman animals. To do so we describe and assess the four most prominent conceptions of ‘personhood’ that can be found in the rulings concerning Kiko and Tommy, with particular focus on the most recent decision, Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc v Lavery.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Thinking Critically About Abortion.Nathan Nobis - 2019 - Decaturish.
    An editorial / opinion piece on abortion: -/- "I’m a philosophy professor who specializes in medical ethics and I teach and write about the ethics of abortion. So I am very familiar with the medical, legal and – most importantly – ethical or moral issues related to HB 481, the so-called “heartbeat bill” that would effectively ban abortion in Georgia. At least hundreds of other philosophy, ethics and law professors in Georgia teach these ethical debates about abortion: they are also, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Moral Nihilism, Intellectual Nihilism & Practical Ethics.Nathan Nobis - 2020 - Academia.Edu Letters.
    Arguments for moral nihilism—the view that there are no moral truths—are criticized by showing that their major premises suggest epistemic or intellectual nihilism—the view that no beliefs are reasonable, justified, ought to be believed, and so on. Insofar as intellectual nihilism ought be rejected, this shows that the major premises of arguments for moral nihilisms ought to be rejected also.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Tom Regan on Kind Arguments Against Animal Rights and for Human Rights.Nathan Nobis - 2016 - In Mylan Engel Jr & Gary Comstock (eds.), The Moral Rights of Animals. Lexington Books. pp. 65-80.
    Tom Regan argues that human beings and some non-human animals have moral rights because they are “subjects of lives,” that is, roughly, conscious, sentient beings with an experiential welfare. A prominent critic, Carl Cohen, objects: he argues that only moral agents have rights and so animals, since they are not moral agents, lack rights. An objection to Cohen’s argument is that his theory of rights seems to imply that human beings who are not moral agents have no moral rights, but (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  32
    Cut the Fat! Defending Trans Fats Bans.Nathan Nobis & Molly Gardner - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (3):39 - 40.
    Is banning trans fat a bad policy? Resnik (2010) offers two general reasons for thinking so. First, because trans fat bans could lead to the government’s placing other objectionable restrictions upon food choices. Second, that, because we can adequately reduce trans fat consumption through education and mandatory labeling, bans are unnecessary. There are good reasons to reject both claims. First, since any slippery slope towards further restrictions on food choices is easily avoided, trans fat bans do not give the cause (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  29.  21
    Fetal Alcohol Syndrome & Abortion: On The Impairment Argument.Nathan Nobis - unknown
    A basic criticism of Perry Hendrick's "Even if the fetus is not a person, abortion is immoral: The Impairment Argument," is offered, namely that the reasons why intentionally causing fetal alcohol syndrome is wrong simply do not apply to fetuses and so the "Impairment Argument" against abortion fails.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  28
    Truth in Ethics and Epistemology: A Defense of Normative Realism.Nathan Nobis - 2005 - Dissertation, University of Rochester
    In this work I defend moral realism, the thesis that there are objective moral truths, by defending “epistemic realism.” Epistemic realism is the thesis that epistemic judgments, e.g., judgments that some belief is epistemically reasonable, or justified, or known or should be held, are sometimes true and made true by stance-independent epistemic facts and properties. -/- One might think that epistemic realism needs no defense because it is obviously true and nearly universally accepted. But there are influential arguments against moral (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31. Abortion and Soundbites: Why Pro-Choice Arguments Are Harder to Make.Nathan Nobis & Kristina Grob - 2019 - Areo Magazine.
    Arguments are nowadays often presented as soundbites: as slogans, tweets, memes and even gifs. Arguments developed in detail often meet the response TL;DR (Too Long, Didn’t Read). This is unfortunate—especially when tackling the topic of abortion. Soundbites make many pro-life arguments seem stronger than they really are, while the complexities of pro-choice arguments can’t be readily reduced to soundbites.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. Early and Later Abortions: Ethics and Law.Nathan Nobis - forthcoming - In Bob Fischer (ed.), Ethics Left and Right: The Moral Issues that Divide Us. Oxford University Press.
    Most abortions occur early in pregnancy. I argue that these abortions, and so most abortions, are not morally wrong and that the best arguments given to think that these abortions are wrong are weak. I also argue that these abortions, and probably all abortions, should be legal. -/- I begin by observing that people sometimes respond to the issue by describing the circumstances of abortion, not offering reasons for their views about those circumstances; I then dismiss “question-begging” arguments about abortion (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. Why IACUCs Need Ethicists.Nathan Nobis - 2020 - ILAR 1.
    Some animal research is arguably morally wrong, and some animal research is morally bad but could be improved. Who is most likely to be able to identify wrong or bad animal research and advocate for improvements? I argue that philosophical ethicists have the expertise that makes them the likely best candidates for these tasks. I review the skills, knowledge and perspectives that philosophical ethicists tend to have which makes them ethical experts. I argue that, insofar as IACUCs are expected to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34.  71
    So Why Does Animal Experimentation Matter? Review of Ellen Frankel Paul and Jeffrey Paul, Eds. 2001. Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research. [REVIEW]Nathan Nobis - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):1-2.
    Frey sets the challenge for the other authors: to explain why, morally, no humans can be subject to the kinds of experiments that animals are subject to and to explain how researchers can reliablyuse animal models to understand and cure human disease. He thinks that the first challenge has not been met; the second challenge is, unfortunately, not directly addressed in this book. Adrian Morrison states that he “abhors” positions like Frey’s, Peter Singer’s and Tom Regan’s. He asserts that all (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  35. Responding to Morally Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies.Nathan Nobis & Victor F. Abundez-Guerra - 2018 - 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology.
    Many historically-influential philosophers had profoundly wrong moral views or behaved very badly. Aristotle thought women were “deformed men” and that some people were slaves “by nature.” Descartes had disturbing views about non-human animals. Hume and Kant were racists. Hegel disparaged Africans. Nietzsche despised sick people. Mill condoned colonialism. Fanon was homophobic. Frege was anti-Semitic; Heidegger was a Nazi. Schopenhauer was sexist. Rousseau abandoned his children. Wittgenstein beat his young students. Unfortunately, these examples are just a start. -/- These philosophers are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36.  12
    The Philosophers’ Brief on Elephant Personhood.Gary Comstock, G. K. D. Crozier, Andrew Fenton, Tyler John, L. Syd M. Johnson, Robert C. Jones, Nathan Nobis, David M. Peña-Guzmán, James Rocha, Bernard E. Rollin & Jeff Sebo - 2020 - New York State Appellate Court.
    We submit this brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project’s efforts to secure habeas corpus relief for the elephant named Happy. We reject arbitrary distinctions that deny adequate protections to other animals who share with protected humans relevantly similar vulnerabilities to harms and relevantly similar interests in avoiding such harms. We strongly urge this Court, in keeping with the best philosophical standards of rational judgment and ethical standards of justice, to recognize that, as a nonhuman person, Happy should be (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. Reply to Christopher Tollefsen on Abortion.Nathan Nobis - forthcoming - In Bob Fischer (ed.), Ethics Left and Right: The Moral Issues that Divide Us.
    Are *you* the same thing as your body? Did *you* begin at conception? Do you have a rational and free "nature" or "essence"? Some answer 'yes' to all and argue that this means that abortion is wrong. This argument is discussed here.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  56
    So Why Does Animal Experimentation Matter? Review of Ellen Frankel Paul and Jeffrey Paul, Eds. 2001. Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research.Nathan Nobis - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):1 – 2.
  39.  6
    Why the Case Against Abortion is Weak, Ethically Speaking.Nathan Nobis - 2021 - Salon 1.
    An argument for pro-choice advocates engaging the ethical arguments about abortion, and more. Public philosophy on abortion and the value of philosophy. With Jonathan Dudley, MD.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40.  32
    Principles of Animal Research Ethics Tom L. Beauchamp and David DeGrazia Oxford University Press: New York, 2020. 176 Pp. Isbn 9780190939120. Us$34.95. [REVIEW]Nathan Nobis - 2020 - Bioethics 34 (9):998-999.
    In Principles of Animal Research Ethics, Tom Beauchamp and David DeGrazia (hereafter B&D) aim to replace the well-known “3Rs”—Replacing animal research with non-animal methods, Reducing the numbers of animals, and Refining experiments to reduce harms and improve welfare—as the guiding principles regulating animal research. . . B&D present their principles as “useful” for people engaged in animal research and as a “philosophically sound” (p. 4) framework for a new ethic for animal research. Regrettably, I have doubts about both these overall (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Abortion and Animal Rights - Does Either Topic Lead to the Other?Nathan Nobis - 2016 - What's Wrong? Blog.
    Should people who believe in animal rights think that abortion is wrong? Should pro-lifers accept animal rights? If you think it’s wrong to kill fetuses to end pregnancies, should you also think it’s wrong to kill animals to, say, eat them? If you, say, oppose animal research, should you also oppose abortion? -/- Some argue ‘yes’ and others argue ‘no’ to either or both sets of questions. The correct answer, however, seems to be, ‘it depends’: it depends on why someone (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Feminist Ethics Without Feminist Ethical Theory.Nathan Nobis - 2005 - Journal of Philosophical Research 30 (Supplement):213-225.
    There are at least two models of what it is to be a feminist ethicist or moral philosopher. One model requires that one accept a distinctively feminist ethical theory. I will argue against this model by arguing that since the concept of a feminist ethical theory is highly unclear, any claim that ethicists who are feminist need one is also unclear and inadequately defended. I will advocate what I call a "minimal model" of feminist ethics, arguing that it is philosophically (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. Animals and Rights.David Graham & Nathan Nobis - 2007 - Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 8 (2).
  44. Moral Realism.Nathan Nobis - 2006 - Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):178-181.
  45.  39
    Bob Fischer, Ed. College Ethics: A Reader on Moral Issues That Affect You.Nathan Nobis - 2017 - Teaching Ethics 17 (2):259-262.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. Environmental Ethics Encyclopedia Entry on Peter Singer.Nathan Nobis - manuscript
    |Scope: | |1. The first sentence should include the subject’s name, life span in | |parenthesis, and place and date of birth (day and month) if known (followed by | |mentioning early work on civil disobedience, perhaps) | |2. Outline key contributions to animal ethics, focusing on Animal Liberation | |and Practical Ethics | |3. Outline contributions to debates on poverty, relating this to environmental | |ethics | |4. Outline more recent work on globalization and climate change eg in One (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47.  34
    Moral Status's Status.Nathan Nobis - manuscript
    What is the moral status of animals? What’s the moral status of fetuses? What’s the moral status of the permanently comatose? While questions like these are sometimes asked (also about ‘moral standing’), I have written a few paragraphs where I argue that the term “moral status” shouldn’t be used.
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  33
    Abortion and Moral Arguments From Analogy.Nathan Nobis & Abubakarr Sidique Jarr-Koroma - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (12):59-61.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  49.  48
    Expectations for Methodology and Translation of Animal Research: A Survey of Health Care Workers.Ari R. Joffe, Meredith Bara, Natalie Anton & Nathan Nobis - 2015 - BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):29.
    Health care workers often perform, promote, and advocate use of public funds for animal research ; therefore, an awareness of the empirical costs and benefits of animal research is an important issue for HCW. We aim to determine what health-care-workers consider should be acceptable standards of AR methodology and translation rate to humans.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50.  71
    A Rational Defense of Animal Experimentation.Nathan Nobis - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):49-62.
    Many people involved in the life sciences and related fields and industries routinely cause mice, rats, dogs, cats, primates and other non-human animals to experience pain, suffering, and an early death, harming these animals greatly and not for their own benefit. Harms, however, require moral justification, reasons that pass critical scrutiny. Animal experimenters and dissectors might suspect that strong moral justification has been given for this kind of treatment of animals. I survey some recent attempts to provide such a justification (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 79