A debunking argument against speciesism

Jaquet, François

doi:10.1007/s11229-019-02080-5

Cited by 19 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are various definitions of speciesism in circulation in the academic literature (contrast [1,2,7]) and beyond. Some authors treat speciesism as an unjustified position by definition [8].…”

Section: Singer's Anti-speciesist Position: a Defencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…One reason why this is a mistake, I will argue in Section 3, has to do with the different epistemic statuses of intuitions: if we know that a given moral intuition comes about through a process that typically gives rise to cognitive biases, then this detracts from the plausibility of the intuition. Moreover, while further research is called for, there is preliminary experimental evidence that at least some speciesist intuitions indeed come about through processes typically associated with cognitive biases [2,7] (Appendix A, 5).…”

Section: Principle Of Morally Relevant Ownership: It Is Morally Relevmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…EDAs hold a promise to revitalise existing ethical debates, especially debates that appear to have turned into deadlocks between conflicting moral intuitions [2]. Instead of discrediting some moral intuitions by appealing to other, more plausible moral intuitions, as in the discussion at the end of Section 2, EDAs can be invoked to scrutinize the tenability of moral intuitions on external grounds-i.e., in terms of their epistemic reliability.…”

Section: Speciesist Intuitions and Evolutionary Debunking Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examining the potential of EDAs is a promising avenue for further research on the topic of speciesism. Other preliminary findings on this topic come from Jaquet, who presents evidence that what he dubs "the speciesist belief" results from the cognitive dissonance of meat-eaters, and who argues that these origins detract from the belief's reliability [2]. This is an interesting claim, and Jaquet's combined normative and experimental approach provides a good example of how inquiry on these matters can proceed.…”

Section: Speciesist Intuitions and Evolutionary Debunking Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recently, Shelly Kagan [1] has entertained the possibility (without wholeheartedly endorsing it) that a version of 'personism' is morally defensible, arguing that either personism should be regarded as a speciesist view, or most people are not speciesists, pace Singer (Appendix A, 2). But new arguments in support of Singer's position have been articulated too, such as François Jaquet's [2] Evolutionary Debunking Argument against speciesism, on the basis of findings from experimental moral psychology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Speciesism Debate: Intuition, Method, and Empirical Advances

Hopster

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple Summary: An influential idea in animal ethics is that moral favouritism towards members of one's own species is a prejudice. This prejudice has been labelled 'speciesism', in analogy with racism and sexism. But not all ethicists subscribe to the view that speciesism is a prejudice. In fact, the tenability of speciesism is a topic of ongoing ethical debate. A recent exchange between Peter Singer and Shelly Kagan might leave the impression that this debate has essentially reached a stalemate, since the disputing parties rely on irreconcilable moral intuitions. In the present article, I argue that this impression is misleading. I highlight both philosophical and empirical research avenues that can help to move the speciesism debate forward, emphasizing that not all ethical intuitions about speciesism should be given equal weight. The article is part of the special issue 'Animal Ethics: Questioning the Orthodoxy'.Abstract: This article identifies empirical, conceptual and normative avenues to advance the speciesism debate. First, I highlight the application of Evolutionary Debunking Arguments (EDAs) as one such avenue: especially where (anti-)speciesist positions heavily rely on appeals to moral intuition, and EDAs have potential to move the debate forward. Second, an avenue for conceptual progress is the delineation of speciesism from other views in its vicinity, specifically from the view that biological differences between species are sometimes morally relevant ('species-relativism'). Third, if we adopt Singer's definition of speciesism, then a limitation of the current debate is that it is not obvious whether the core ethical principle that underlies anti-speciesist positions-the Principle of Equal Consideration of Interests-is widely applicable. Arguably, the interests of animals are often too dissimilar to establish what equal consideration amounts to. I underscore the need for integrating philosophical and empirical research, to come to terms with the extent to which the interests of members of different species are alike, and with the question of whether any dissimilarities might be morally relevant."Our inclination to treat humans as though we are special is no mere prejudice. Despite what Singer says, there is a significant philosophical view at work here-one worthy of careful further investigation." Shelly Kagan [1] (p. 20)"At the end of the day, no clear consensus has emerged-or, at best, this one: no rejoinder to Singer's attack on speciesism has convinced many besides its author, and the challenge remains." François Jaquet [2] (p. 2)

show abstract

Section: Singer's Anti-speciesist Position: a Defencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Principle Of Morally Relevant Ownership: It Is Morally Relevmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Speciesist Intuitions and Evolutionary Debunking Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Speciesist Intuitions and Evolutionary Debunking Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Speciesism Debate: Intuition, Method, and Empirical Advances

Hopster

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The ethics of sustainable AI: Why animals (should) matter for a sustainable use of AI

Bossert

Hagendorff

2023

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technologies equipped with artificial intelligence (AI) influence our everyday lives in a variety of ways. Due to their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, their high use of energy, but also their impact on fairness issues, these technologies are increasingly discussed in the “sustainable AI” discourse. However, current “sustainable AI” approaches remain anthropocentric. In this article, we argue from the perspective of applied ethics that such anthropocentric outlook falls short. We present a sentientist approach, arguing that the normative foundation of sustainability and sustainable development—that is, theories of intra‐ and intergenerational justice—should include sentient animals. Consequently, theories of sustainable AI must also be non‐anthropocentric. Moreover, we investigate consequences of our approach for applying AI technologies in a sustainable way.

show abstract

Animals Used as a Source of Food

Martin¹

2023

The Moral Implications of Human and Animal Vulnerability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, more sentient animals are used for their meat, milk, and eggs than ever before in history. This chapter shows that many—but not all—uses of animals for food are morally problematic. Speciesist prejudices mask that animals are commonly due more consideration than we give them. First, this chapter examines animal products involving suffering, arguing that such products are often—but not always—morally problematic. Second, it discusses whether there is a problem with killing animals which could be deemed “happy.” Third, it argues against “principled veganism,” contending that dependency does not necessarily result in increased vulnerability. Finally, it is concluded that we should recognize many groups of animals we commonly use for food as particularly vulnerable and augment their protection accordingly.

show abstract

A debunking argument against speciesism

Abstract: Many people believe that human interests matter much more than the like interests of nonhuman animals, and this "speciesist belief" plays a crucial role in the philosophical debate

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

The Speciesism Debate: Intuition, Method, and Empirical Advances

The Speciesism Debate: Intuition, Method, and Empirical Advances

The ethics of sustainable AI: Why animals (should) matter for a sustainable use of AI

Animals Used as a Source of Food

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About