This text examines and questions the view s of those theorists have argued in defense of speciesism. Read more
The appeal to intuitions shouldn’t lead us to accept speciesism or other questionable moral views. Read more
Why should we respect animals? Human beings are capable of experiencing suffering and feeling joy. That is why we can be harmed or benefited by […] Read more
Respecting someone means taking their wellbeing into account, and in order to be taken into account, sentience is what matters. Any other condition would be irrelevant to the question of whether one’s wellbeing should be considered. Other conditions may be relevant for something else (for instance, having certain intellectual capacities certainly appears to be relevant for being admitted to a university). But they are not relevant for being taken into account when what is at stake is wellbeing. Read more
The argument from impartiality claims that if we considered the treatment of animals impartially, we would not accept treating them worse than humans. Read more
Those who consider it legitimate to treat nonhuman animals unfavorably based on their capacities cannot defend equal treatment of all humans. Read more
The question of whether or not we should favor the interests of humans over those of nonhuman animals is at the core of animal ethics. The view that we should favor human interests has been criticized as speciesist. Read more
Arguments that beg the question, also known as circular arguments, have trivial conclusions because the premises assume what they are claiming to prove. To put it another way: we can’t be convinced of something by an appeal to a premise we can’t accept. Read more
Speciesism is a form of discrimination – discrimination against those who don’t belong to a certain species. Speciesism is giving different sentient beings differing moral consideration for unjust reasons. Read more