Animal Ethics and the Problem of Direct Conflict

Contemporary theories on animal ethics, particularly utilitarian and deontological accounts, can provide clear answers to questions of how animals should be considered ethically when humans and animals have different interests at stake. However, both accounts are unable to provide solutions in cases where both parties have a similar basic interest at stake; for example in direct, unavoidable conflicts for the same food, land or resources, seen when elephants destroy crops, baboons raid farms etc. By exploring Singer’s utilitarian view and Regan’s deontological accounts in detail, I will demonstrate that these approaches cannot solve conflicts of this kind since both parties are weighted equally. This will serve to highlight the importance of reconceptualising animal ethics in terms of an ethically relevant quality that can be held in degrees, and that an individual can have more or less of

Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Political science · Engineering · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Theology and Philosophy of Evil · War, Ethics, and Justification

• An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation

  Jeremy Bentham, J H Burns et al.•An introduction to the principles…•1789

  Add to list

• Animal Rights Theory and Utilitarianism

  Open Access•Gary L Francione•Between the Species An Online…•2003

  Add to list

• Animal Liberation

  Peter Singer•Animal Rights•1973

  Add to list