uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Virtue of Precaution Regarding the Moral Status of Animals with Uncertain Sentience
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Department of Philosophy.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0319-8273
Univ Gothenburg, Dept Philosophy Linguist & Theory Sci, Box 200, S-40530 Gothenburg, Sweden..
2017 (English)In: Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, ISSN 1187-7863, E-ISSN 1573-322X, Vol. 30, no 2, p. 213-224Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We address the moral importance of fish, invertebrates such as crustaceans, snails and insects, and other animals about which there is qualified scientific uncertainty about their sentience. We argue that, on a sentientist basis, one can at least say that how such animals fare make ethically significant claims on our character. It is a requirement of a morally decent (or virtuous) person that she at least pays attention to and is cautious regarding the possibly morally relevant aspects of such animals. This involves having a moral stance, in the sense of patterns of perception, such that one notices such animals as being morally relevant in various situations. For the person who does not already consider these animals in this way, this could be a big change in moral psychology, and can be assumed to have behavioural consequences, albeit indeterminate. Character has been largely neglected in the literature, which focuses on act-centred approaches (i.e. that the evidence on sentience supports, or does not support, taking some specific action). We see our character-centred approach as complementary to, not superior to, act-centred approaches. Our approach has the advantage of allowing us to make ethically interesting and practically relevant claims about a wider range of cases, but it has the drawback of providing less specific action guidance.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPRINGER , 2017. Vol. 30, no 2, p. 213-224
Keyword [en]
Ethics, Insects, Invertebrates, Fish, Pain, Sentience
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-328265DOI: 10.1007/s10806-017-9662-yISI: 000403037200004OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-328265DiVA, id: diva2:1168382
Available from: 2017-12-20 Created: 2017-12-20 Last updated: 2017-12-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Knutsson, Simon
By organisation
Department of Philosophy
In the same journal
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics
Ethics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 23 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf