article thumbnail

John Passmore (1914-2004) on Animal Suffering

Animal Ethics

They had a direct effect on seventeenth-century behavior as manifested, for example, in the popularity of public vivisections, not as an aid to scientific discovery but simply as a technical display. These teachings, it should be observed, were more than metaphysical speculations.

article thumbnail

John Passmore (1914-2004) on the History of Animal Cruelty

Animal Ethics

So while it is generally agreed that it is wrong to experiment on human beings without their consent in the expectation of making scientific discoveries, there is no such general opposition to animal vivisection. Biological warfare against human beings is generally condemned but not biological warfare against animals.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

John Passmore (1914-2004) on the Moral Status of Animals

Animal Ethics

But they now turn around the question what is to count as "making animals suffer unnecessarily," whether, for example, vivisection or fox-hunting are, in these terms, morally justifiable. Controversies no doubt remain.

Morals 40
article thumbnail

Deconstructing Slate's "Pepper" Series

Animal Person

This one addresses the decreasing number of dogs and cats being experimented on and, without mentioning it, discusses speciesism and our affection for dogs--pet dogs particularly (and especially purebreds)--which leads to our revulsion with the idea of snatching, vivisecting and killing them. But that's now what happened. Or mute babies?