This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Well, as it turns out neither a trip to a slaughterhouse nor killing an animal yourself is powerful enough to make people go vegan. The bottom line is that there are many reasons why human-animal interactions are so often inconsistent and paradoxical. But I’m merely making his point.
She specializes in Environmental Ethics, Human-Animal Ethics, and Moral Psychology. Her coming Earth Day lecture couldn't be more timely in light of our increasing awareness of global warming and other human-induced negative impacts on the environment.
As Montgomery shows, falconry is different from any other human/animal interaction. She herself is a vegetarian, one of the sort that mourns even roadkill. The post also has, in the appended Comments section, a long colloquy on falconry, mostly pro with some con, well worth a look.].
There was no meaningful discussion about our inefficient use of resources (grain and water) in the feeding of animals to kill to feed people. With regard to cruelty and suffering, it's clear from the film that the humananimal has been profoundly negatively affected by climate change, but there is no attention given to nonhuman animals.
I propose that the moral significance of the suffering, mutilation, and death of non-humananimals rests on the following, which may be called the overflow principle: Act towards that which, while not itself a person, is closely associated with personhood in a way coherent with an attitude of respect for persons.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content