Animal Welfare
What is Terence Cuneo's deontological argument for animal welfare?
1) If something is a subject of a life, then it has basic welfare rights.
2) Farm animals are the subjects of a life.
3) Farm animals therefore have basic welfare rights
4) Eating the meat of farm animals violates their welfare rights
5) We ought not to violate the basic welfare rights of others.
Therefore, we ought not to eat meat.
What is the difference between positive and negative duties? Is giving to charity a positive or a negative duty?
Negative duties = the duty to refrain from doing something.
Positive duties = The duty to do something
Giving to charity is a positive duty.
What is Booker T. Washington's argument against protest?
Washington argues that someone should not protest wrongs committed against them unless they could take decisive steps to end them. He argues that protesting conveys a lack of self respect because it appeals to sympathy rather than relying on one's own efforts to change a situation.
What might Aristotle say about animal welfare?
Potential answer: Treating animals well cultivates human virtue, which leads to a good life. Doing so may not be morally required, but it is good insofar as it cultivates virtue.
What is the difference between moral agents and moral patients? How does this distinction come to bear on the discussion of animal welfare?
Moral agent = Someone who is capable of acting morally, i.e. who is moved my moral reasons and who can engage in moral reflection.
Moral patients = A being that is owed moral consideration.
Animals are moral patients but not moral agents. The argument against animal welfare states that because animals are not moral agents, we do not owe them moral consideration. The argument for animal welfare states that whether a being is a moral agent is irrelevant to whether it is a moral patient. We therefore owe moral consideration to animals even though animals themselves aren't capable of acting morally.
What is the rescue principle? According to the rescue principle, are the wealthy obligated to give their money to charity?
rescue principle: If its in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally to do it.
This implies that the wealthy are obligated to give money to charity. This is because they can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing something of equal moral importance.
What are the real-life implications of Delmas' argument for the moral permissibility of uncivil disobedience?
What might Kant say about uncivil disobedience?
Potential answer 1: We have a duty not to break the law because following the law is a universal moral duty. If it were OK for everyone to break the law, society would be in shambles.
Potential answer 2: We have a duty to fight injustice whenever we can, no matter what the consequences are to our own wellbeing.
Raise an objection to the following claim: We do not have a moral responsibility towards animals because they do not have reason.
The Problem of Marginal Cases: There are lots of people who are not rational. This argument implies that we do not have moral duties to a large swath of the population.
Changing sense of responsibly from the credit sense of responsibility to the care-taking sense of responsibility, which emphasizes promoting others wellbeing
Opponents of disobedience claim that it is undemocratic. Explain this argument and Delmas' response.
Disobedience is undemocratic because dissenters flout the democratic lawmaking process and refuse to comply with the outcomes of the democratic process.
Delmas responds by arguing that dissenters are often protesting a lack of democracy and that disobedience is aimed at advancing the cause of Democracy. She also argues that disobedience can be seen as an exercise in political participation where normal political processes have failed.
What might Kant say about animal welfare?
Option 1: We have a duty towards improving the welfare of animals - killing an animal is not a universalizable moral rule.
Option 2: We are not morally obligated to animals because they are not rational, cannot communicate with us, and so on.
Raise an objection to the following claim: Eating meat is morally permissible because individual actions make no difference as to whether factory farming continues on a wide spread scale.
- If enough people stop, fewer animals would be killed.
- There is symbolic value in not supporting a cruel practice.
Raise an objection to the following claim: I am not obliged to consume ethically because responsibility for ensuring safe working conditions lands on the shoulders of governments and companies.
- Doing something because it is the right thing to do, not because it leads to a better outcome (Deontological approach)
- Governments and companies are moved by consumer action
Delmas outlines three counter arguments to her argument that incivil disobedience is morally permissible. Choose one to explain.
1. Effectiveness: Incivility is not an effective way of motivating political change.
2. Forward-Looking Concerns: The values guiding resistance in liberation struggles should be those animating the ideal world.
3. Civic Friendship: Incivility violates the moral commitment to preserving citizen's willingness to live together.
What might JS Mill say about ethical consumption?
Happiness principle: We ought to maximize happiness and minimize pain.
I can (potentially) maximize happiness by buying ethically, without any significant cost to myself.