Conclusion
The past one hundred fifty years of debate over the use of animals in research and testing has been characterized mainly byad hominem attacks and on uncritical rejection of the other sides’ arguments. In the classroom, it is important to avoid repeating exercises in public relations and to demand sound scholarship.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bliss, M. (1982)The Discovery of Insulin. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Prentice, E.D., Fox, I.J., Dixon, R.S., Antonson, D.I. and Lawson, T.A. (1994) History, donor considerations and ethics of xenotransplantation and xenoperfusion, In: Smith, A.C. & Swindle, M.M., eds.Research Animal Anesthesia, Analgesia and Surgery. Scientists Center for Animal Welfare, Bethesda MD, USA.
Rowan, A.N., Loew, F.M. & Weer, J. (1995)The Animal Research Controversy, Protest, Process and Public Policy: An Analysis of Strategic Issues. Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy, North Grafton MA, USA.
Tannenbaum, J. & Rowan, A.N. (1985) Rethinking the morality of animal research.The Hastings Report 15 (5): 32–43.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This paper is a modification of material originally included in the handbook which accompanied the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Seminar “Teaching Ethics in Science and Engineering”, 10–11 February 1993.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rowan, A.N. Ethics education in science and engineering: The case of animal research. Sci Eng Ethics 1, 181–184 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02584075
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02584075