On Respecting Animals, or Can Animals be Wronged Without Being Harmed?

There is broad agreement that humans can be wronged independently of their incurring any harm, that is, when their welfare is not affected. Examples include unnoticed infringements of privacy, ridiculing unaware individuals, or disregarding individuals' autonomous decision-making in their best inter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Res Publica (13564765) Vol. 25; no. 1; pp. 83 - 100
Autor principal: Martin, Angela K.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=134171214&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 134171214
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        13564765
        NMV
      jtl: Res Publica (13564765)
      issn: 13564765
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2019
      vid: 25
      iid: 1
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        134171214
        10.1007/s11158-017-9379-9
      ppf: 83
      ppct: 17
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 414KB
      tig:
        atl: On Respecting Animals, or Can Animals be Wronged Without Being Harmed?
      aug:
        au: Martin, Angela K.
        affil: Department of Philosophy, University of Fribourg, Avenue de l'Europe 20, 1700, Freiburg, Switzerland
      su:
        Animal welfare
        Decision making
        Ethics
        Public welfare policy
        Right of privacy
      sug:
        subj:
          Animal welfare
          Decision making
          Ethics
          Public welfare policy
          Right of privacy
      keyword:
        Animal ethics
        Discrimination
        Harm
        Humiliation
        Respect
      ab: There is broad agreement that humans can be wronged independently of their incurring any harm, that is, when their welfare is not affected. Examples include unnoticed infringements of privacy, ridiculing unaware individuals, or disregarding individuals' autonomous decision-making in their best interest. However, it is less clear whether the same is true of animals—that is, whether moral agents can wrong animals in situations that do not involve any harm to the animals concerned. In order to answer this question, I concentrate on the illustrative case of treating animals in a demeaning yet harmless way that would be disrespectful if humans were concerned. I discuss whether such actions are permissible or unjustifiably discriminatory from a moral point of view. I conclude that moral agents cannot directly wrong animals without harming them and thus do not owe it to a particular animal to refrain from such actions. However, if the actions increase the likelihood that animal abuse will occur, this presents a strong indirect reason against performing them. Thus, the reasons for refraining from such actions are merely indirect rather than direct.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Res Publica (13564765) is a copyright of Springer, 2019. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Res Publica (13564765)
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2019
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N