Acta Biotheoretica

, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 153–171

Concepts of Animal Welfare in Relation to Positions in Animal Ethics

Regular Article
  • 825 Downloads

Abstract

When animal ethicists deal with welfare they seem to face a dilemma: On the one hand, they recognize the necessity of welfare concepts for their ethical approaches. On the other hand, many animal ethicists do not want to be considered reformist welfarists. Moreover, animal welfare scientists may feel pressed by moral demands for a fundamental change in our attitude towards animals. The analysis of this conflict from the perspective of animal ethics shows that animal welfare science and animal ethics highly depend on each other. Welfare concepts are indispensable in the whole field of animal ethics. Evidence for this can be found by analyzing the structure of theories of animal ethics and the different ways in which these theories employ welfare concepts. Furthermore, the background of values underneath every welfare theory is essential to pursue animal welfare science. Animal ethics can make important contributions to the clarification of underlying normative assumptions with regard to the value of the animal, with regard to ideas about what is valuable for the animal, and with regard to the actions that should follow from the results of animal welfare science.

Keywords

Animal welfare Animal ethics Animal welfare science Moral reasoning Moral value 

References

  1. Amsterdam B (1972) Mirror image reactions before age two. Dev Psychobiol 5:297–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appleby MC, Hughes BO (eds) (2003) Animal welfare. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Benson GJ, Rollin BE (eds) (2004) The well-being of farm animals. Challenges and solutions. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Broom DM (1991) Animal welfare. Concepts and measurement. J Anim Sci 69:4167–4175Google Scholar
  5. Carruthers P (1989) Brute experience. J Phil 86:258–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carruthers P (1992) The animals issue. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clayton NS, Dickinson A (1998) Episodic-like memory during cache recovery by scrub jays. Nature 395:272–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crisp R (1997) Mill on utilitarianism. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. DeGrazia D (1996) Taking animals seriously. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Donovan J, Adams CJ (eds) (2007) The feminist care tradition in animal ethics. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Duncan IJH (1993) Welfare is to do with what animals feel. J Agric Environ Ethics 6:8–14Google Scholar
  12. Duncan IJH, Fraser D (2003) Understanding animal welfare. In: Appleby M, Hughes BO (eds) Animal welfare. CABI, Wallingford, pp 19–31Google Scholar
  13. Francione G (2008) Animals as persons. Essays on the abolition of animal exploitation. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Fraser D, Preece R (2004) Animal ethics and the scientific study of animals. Bridging the ‘is’ and the ‘ought’. Essays Philos 5/2. http://sorrel.humboldt.edu/~essays/fraser.html. Accessed 11 May 2010
  15. Frey RG (1996) Medicine, animal experimentation, and the moral problem of unfortunate humans. Soc Phil Policy 13:181–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gewirth A (1978) Reason and morality. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. Haynes RP (2008) Animal welfare. Competing conceptions and their ethical implications. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  18. Holtug N (1996) Is welfare all that matters in our moral obligations to animals? Acta Agric Scand A Anim Sci Suppl 27:16–21Google Scholar
  19. Kallhoff A (2002) Prinzipien der Pflanzenethik. Campus, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  20. Nordenfelt L (2006) Animal and human health and welfare: a comparative philosophical analysis. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Nussbaum MC (2004) Beyond ‘compassion and humanity’. Justice for nonhuman animals. In: Sunstein CR, Nussbaum MC (eds) Animal rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 299–320Google Scholar
  22. Prior H, Schwarz A, Güntürkün O (2008) Mirror-induced behavior in the magpie (Pica pica): evidence of self-recognition. PLoS Biol 6(8): e202. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060202
  23. Regan T (1983) The case for animal rights. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  24. Russell J, Alexis D, Clayton NS (2010) Episodic future thinking in 3- to 5-year-old children: the ability to think of what will be needed from a different point of view. Cognition 114:56–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rutgers B, Heeger R (1999) Inherent worth and respect for animal integrity. In: Dol M et al (eds) Recognizing the intrinsic value of animals. Van Gorcum, Assen, pp 41–51Google Scholar
  26. Schmidt K (2008) Tierethische Probleme der Gentechnik. Zur moralischen Bewertung der Reduktion wesentlicher tierlicher Eigenschaften. Mentis, PaderbornGoogle Scholar
  27. Singer P (1993) Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith KR (2002) Animal genetic manipulation—a utilitarian response. Bioethics 16:55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tannenbaum J (1991) Ethics and animal welfare. The inextricable connection. J Am Vet Med Assoc 198(8):1360–1376Google Scholar
  30. Webster J (2005) Animal welfare. Limping towards Eden. Blackwell, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für PhilosophieRuhr-Universität BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations