Premium Members Get 10% Off and Earn Rewards Find Out More
Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications
Members of the “animal welfare science community”, which includes both scientists and philosophers, have illegitimately appropriated the concept of animal welfare by claiming to have given a scientific account of it that is more objectively valid than the more “sentimental” account given by animal liberationists. This strategy has been used to argue for merely limited reform in the use of animals. This strategy was initially employed as a way of “sympathetically” responding to the abolitionist claims of anti-vivisectionists, who objected to the use of animals in research. It was subsequently used by farm animal scientists. The primarily reformist (as opposed to abolitionist) goals of this community make the false assumption that there are conditions under which animals may be raised and slaughtered for food or used as models in scientific research that are ethically acceptable. The tendency of the animal welfare science community is to accept this assumption as their framework of inquiry, and thus to discount certain practices as harmful to the interests of the animals that they affect. For example, animal welfare is conceptualized is such a way that death does not count as harmful to the interests of animal, nor prolonged life a benefit.
1116650468
Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications
Members of the “animal welfare science community”, which includes both scientists and philosophers, have illegitimately appropriated the concept of animal welfare by claiming to have given a scientific account of it that is more objectively valid than the more “sentimental” account given by animal liberationists. This strategy has been used to argue for merely limited reform in the use of animals. This strategy was initially employed as a way of “sympathetically” responding to the abolitionist claims of anti-vivisectionists, who objected to the use of animals in research. It was subsequently used by farm animal scientists. The primarily reformist (as opposed to abolitionist) goals of this community make the false assumption that there are conditions under which animals may be raised and slaughtered for food or used as models in scientific research that are ethically acceptable. The tendency of the animal welfare science community is to accept this assumption as their framework of inquiry, and thus to discount certain practices as harmful to the interests of the animals that they affect. For example, animal welfare is conceptualized is such a way that death does not count as harmful to the interests of animal, nor prolonged life a benefit.
54.99 In Stock
Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications

Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications

by Richard P. Haynes
Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications

Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications

by Richard P. Haynes

Overview

Members of the “animal welfare science community”, which includes both scientists and philosophers, have illegitimately appropriated the concept of animal welfare by claiming to have given a scientific account of it that is more objectively valid than the more “sentimental” account given by animal liberationists. This strategy has been used to argue for merely limited reform in the use of animals. This strategy was initially employed as a way of “sympathetically” responding to the abolitionist claims of anti-vivisectionists, who objected to the use of animals in research. It was subsequently used by farm animal scientists. The primarily reformist (as opposed to abolitionist) goals of this community make the false assumption that there are conditions under which animals may be raised and slaughtered for food or used as models in scientific research that are ethically acceptable. The tendency of the animal welfare science community is to accept this assumption as their framework of inquiry, and thus to discount certain practices as harmful to the interests of the animals that they affect. For example, animal welfare is conceptualized is such a way that death does not count as harmful to the interests of animal, nor prolonged life a benefit.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9789048179343
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Publication date: 11/23/2010
Edition description: Softcover reprint of hardcover 1st ed. 2008
Pages: 162
Product dimensions: 6.10(w) x 9.25(h) x 0.24(d)

Table of Contents

Preface Introduction PART I. The Science of Laboratory Animal Care and Welfare Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. The Roots for the Emerging Science of Laboratory Animal Welfare in Great Britain Chapter 3. The Historical Roots of the Science of Laboratory Animal Welfare in the US Chapter 4. Laboratory Animal Welfare Issue in the US. Legislative and Regulatory History Chapter 5. Mandated Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees Chapter 6. Do Regulators of Animal Welfare Need to Develop a Theory of Psychological Well-being?
Chapter 7. Conclusion PART II. The Emergence of the Science of Food Animal Welfare Mandated by the Brambell Commission Report Chapter 8. Introduction Chapter 9. Rollin’s Theory of Animal Welfare and its Ethical Implications Chapter 10. Duncan and the Inclusion of Subjectivity Chapter 11. Fraser on Animal Welfare, Science, and Ethics Chapter 12. Appleby-Sandoe and the Human Welfare Model Chapter 13. Nordenfelt and Nussbaum on Animal Welfare Chapter 14. Conclusion PART III. Giving Animal What We Owe Them Chapter 15. Introduction to Part III Chapter 16. The Fair Deal Argument Chapter 17. A General Theory of Our Moral Obligations to Nonhuman Animals Chapter 18. Conclusion Index.
From the B&N Reads Blog
Page 1 of

Related Subjects

Nature
Animals
Animal Rights
Animals - Maintenance, Rescue & Rehabilitation
Nature
Animals
Animal Rights
Animals - Maintenance, Rescue & Rehabilitation

Customer Reviews