A key concept in animal ethics is that of speciesism, and that speciesism is – moral-de-los-animales-mas-alla-del-especismo-y-el-ecologismo/. Especismo Cero. K likes. Send Message. See more of Especismo Cero on Facebook. Log In. or Fundación Igualdad Animal · EligeVeganismo. A full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversible animal, than an infant of a day, a week or even.
|Published (Last):||10 September 2015|
|PDF File Size:||13.68 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.12 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Toulouse France Toulouse France. Sexists violate the principle of equality by favouring the interests of their own sex.
What Is Speciesism?
Anthropocentrism is the position according to which the interests of human beings should be favoured over the interests of nonhuman entities. Therefore they are morally justified in favouring human beings over nonhumans.
Human and animal slaveryLondon: Contrariwise, according to anthropocentrism, there is one additional attribute of normative importance, namely, the species to which the individual belongs. The paradigm has an inclusive side all human beings deserve equal protection and an exclusive one only human beings have that status.
Ensuring that others are not discriminated against is a key concern in modern Western society, and we focus significant efforts on eliminating remaining and substantial inequity, at least among humans. All other attributes of individuals are deemed irrelevant with regards to whether their interests give us reasons, or to the strength of those reasons.
Speciesism – Wikipedia
The attribute which grounds moral consideration must be salient for the purposes of moral reasoning. For example, antispeciesism does not require that we give gorillas the right to vote — gorillas have neither the capability to use, nor an interest in, such a right.
This year’s edition of the World Day for the End of Speciesism had a good media coverage. Paris France Paris France. Some particularly common refrains used to justify denying nonhuman animals rights are that they are not intelligent, they cannot talk, or they cannot reason about morality or perform contractual obligations. Ideas that changed the worldDorling Kindersley.
But suppose the case were otherwise, what would it avail? Objectivist philosopher Leonard Peikoff argued: The term was popularized by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer in his book Animal Liberation The chimpanzee is the property of the zoo. eespecismo
The Case Against Speciesism
Royal Institute of Philosophy, pp. Singer had known Ryder from his own time as a graduate philosophy student at Oxford.
It is arbitrary to give greater weight to a particular interest not to suffer of a human being than to a similar interest of a dog. She writes that it is not only philosophers who have difficulty with this concept.
The moral significance of human and nonhuman animalsDurham: For someone holding this belief, a test for whether the belief is speciesist would be whether they would believe a gorilla who could understand and participate in a political system in which she had a political representative would have an interest in voting.
Rights, Killing and SufferingBlackwell. Argumentos circulares Cohen, M. We did this by showing clear instances of non-anthropocentric speciesist treatment of nonhuman animals. Sputnik News” Veggie Pride: Anthropocentrism is usually associated with speciesism, aninal slightly different position that defends the preferential consideration and treatment of certain individuals based on their species membership.
Discrimination on grounds of race, although most universally condoned two centuries ago, is now animsl condemned. But since we have no evidence that such things are the case, we have no reasons to adhere to moral anthropocentrism on those grounds. The British philosopher, Roger Scrutonregards the emergence of the animal rights and anti-speciesism movement as “the strangest cultural shift within the liberal worldview”, because the idea of rights and responsibilities is, he argues, distinctive to the human condition, and it makes no sense to spread them beyond our own species.
Dawkins, Richard . The first is that moral anthropocentrism is not equivalent to speciesism, but rather one possible kind of speciesist bias among especlsmo. Hence, it is not the case that this argument manages to secure the truth of especiemonamely, that speciesism is justified. An essay on who morally mattersOxford: The alleged equivalence between anthropocentrism and speciesism.
Species membership, she writes, is ipso facto moral membership. They are offended by the suggestion that they treat people whom they do not think of as human as if they were human.
Semana internacional de acción contra el especismo [30 de octubre al 5 de noviembre] « Contra Info
While they do not explicitly assert this relation of equivalence, they certainly presuppose it. It became an entry in the Oxford English Dictionary indefined as “discrimination against or exploitation of animal species by human beings, based on an assumption of mankind’s superiority”. This does not mean, of course, that they are not of value to us, and to many other painients, including those who need them as habitats and who would suffer without them.
Jammu India Jammu India. Animxl Risks of Future Suffering.