Working with and for Animals
Getting the Theoretical Framework Right
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2183859 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Martha C Nussbaum |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 2-18 |
| Publication date | 2018-01-02 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Human Development (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1464-9888 • E-ISSN: 1469-9516 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/19452829.2017.1418963 |
| OpenAlex | W2783168200 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 12 |
Two common approaches to the ethics of animal welfare are profoundly defective. One, an anthropocentric approach that orders forms of life by their likeness to human life, fails to grasp the variety and complexity of animal lives. A second, the Utilitarian approach, does better by seeing that pain is ubiquitously bad, but it does not articulate the diverse ways in which animal lives can be thwarted. I argue that a version of the Capabilities approach does much better, directing law and policy well. I develop this approach and confront it with a number of difficult questions
Animal ethics · Animal welfare · Anthropocentrism · Biology · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · GRASP · Law and economics · Sentience · Sociology · Animal testing and alternatives · Computer Science · Ethics in medical practice · Philosophy · Artificial Intelligence · Ecology
Nussbaum’s Capabilities Approach to Compassionate Conservation
Greater Than Parts
What Do Chimeras Think About
Nussbaum’s capability approach and African environmental ethics
Should we Ascribe Capabilities to Species and Ecosystems? A Critical Analysis of Ecocentric Versions of the Capabilities Approach
Toward a theory of ecosystem well-being
How Nussbaum's Capabilities Approach Values the Environment
An Empirical Analysis of Nussbaum’s Central Capabilities
Chattel or Child
| Citations per year | 1.29 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2026 (8) |
| Highly cited | No |