From eye-witness accounts of elephants apparently mourning the death of family members to an experiment that showed that hungry rhesus monkeys would not take food if doing so gave another monkey an electric shock, there is much evidence of animals displaying what seem to be moral feelings. But despite such suggestive evidence, philosophers steadfastly deny that animals can act morally, and for reasons that virtually everyone has found convincing. In Can Animals be Moral?, philosopher Mark Rowlands examines the reasoning of philosophers and scientists on this question--ranging from Aristotle and Kant to Hume and Darwin--and reveals that their arguments fall far short of compelling. The basic argument against moral behavior in animals is that humans have capabilities that animals lack. We can reflect on our motivations, formulate abstract principles that allow that allow us to judge right from wrong. For an actor to be moral, he or she must be able scrutinize their motivations and actions. No animal can do these things--no animal is moral. Rowland naturally agrees that humans possess a moral consciousness that no animal can rival, but he argues that it is not necessary for an individual to have the ability to reflect on his or her motives to be moral. Animals can't do all that we can do, but they can act on the basis of some moral reasons--basic moral reasons involving concern for others. And when they do this, they are doing just what we do when we act on the basis of these reasons: They are acting morally.
Examines the moral behavior observed in animals and argues that human beings are not the only species to live by the principles of cooperation, kindness, and empathy.
'Subhuman' argues that our attitudes to nonhuman animals, both positive and negative, largely arise from our need to compare ourselves to them.
What are the biological roots of self-deception? These are among the questions that have made The Moral Animal one of the most provocative science books in recent years, as well as one of the most genuinely important.
Edited by Mylan Engel Jr. and Gary Lynn Comstock, this book employs different ethical lenses, including classical deontology, libertarianism, commonsense morality, virtue ethics, utilitarianism, and the capabilities approach, to explore the ...
Gary Steiner argues that ethologists and philosophers in the analytic and continental traditions have largely failed to advance an adequate explanation of animal behavior.
Aren’t these clear signs that animals have recognizable emotions and moral intelligence? With Wild Justice Marc Bekoff and Jessica Pierce unequivocally answer yes.
Beauchamp, Tom L. and Frey, R. G. (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Animal Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Bekoff, Marc and Pierce, ... Capra, Frank, Director. It's a Wonderful Life. RKO, 1946. Capra, Frank, Director.
The Illusion of Simplicity Callicott credits to Mary Midgley the model of nested communities, each generating specific moral obligations, which become stronger as one moves closer to the centre of the circle.36 But Midgley herself ...
Received opinion has it that humans are morally superior to non-human animals; human interests matter more than the like interests of animals and the value of human lives is alleged to be greater than the value of nonhuman animal lives.
D. Smith (London: Pax Christi and Friends of the Earth). Sextus Empiricus (1933) Outlines of Pyrrhonism I tr. R. G. Bury ( London: Heinemann). Singer, P. (1976) Animal Liberation (London: Cape). —— (ed.) (1985) In Defence of Animals ...