SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

tom karlsson
 

Search: tom karlsson > (2005-2009) > Doctoral thesis > Weighing Animal Liv...

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Weighing Animal Lives : A Critical Assessment of Justification and Prioritization in Animal-Rights Theories

Karlsson, Fredrik, 1977- (author)
Uppsala universitet,Etik och Religionsfilosofi,Ethics,MIA
Grenholm, Carl-Henric, Professor (thesis advisor)
Uppsala universitet,Etik och Religionsfilosofi
Brom, Frans W. A., Dr. (opponent)
Rathenau Instituut, Haag, Nederländerna
show more...
Sundman, Per (opponent)
Uppsala universitet
show less...
 (creator_code:org_t)
ISBN 9789155475765
Uppsala : Uppsala universitet, 2009
English 345 s.
Series: Uppsala Studies in Social Ethics, 0346-6507 ; 38
  • Doctoral thesis (other academic/artistic)
Abstract Subject headings
Close  
  • The project underlying this dissertation aims at analyzing three pro-animal-rights theories, evaluating the theories, and outlining an alternative theoretical account of animal rights. The analytical categories are justification and function of animal rights, the definition of the right holder, and the resolution approach to rights conflict. The categories are applied to a naturalist, a theocentric, and a contractarian approach to defend animal rights. The evaluation is substantiated by the assumption that rights are meant to protect less powerful beings against more powerful aggressors. The constructive segment is an investigation into what extent identified disadvantages of the theories can be avoided by outlining a new model for animal rights.The analyses and evaluation suggest that all three theories are at risk of contradicting the proper function of rights-based theories. Tom Regan’s naturalist account of animal rights includes a logical possibility to sacrifice less capable beings for the sake of more capable beings. Andrew Linzey’s theocentric case for animal rights may sometimes mean that vulnerable human persons should be sacrificed for more powerful non-human beings. Mark Rowlands’ outlined contractarian model, further reconstructed in this work, fails to provide a way to resolve rights conflicts, making the function of rights inapplicable to conflicts.In conclusion, it is suggested that defining the right holder as a self-preservative being can be supported by, at least, the contractarian rationale. That would also conform to the proper function of rights-based theories. It is also suggested that this means that rights conflicts should be resolved by a voluntary sacrifice of the most powerful being. Practical circumstances should be created where such voluntarity is both genuine and rationally possible.

Subject headings

HUMANIORA  -- Filosofi, etik och religion -- Etik (hsv//swe)
HUMANITIES  -- Philosophy, Ethics and Religion -- Ethics (hsv//eng)

Keyword

Animal rights
justification
prioritization
applied ethics
proper function
justice
rights language
vivisection
rights conflict
Ethics
Etik
Etik
Ethics

Publication and Content Type

vet (subject category)
dok (subject category)

Find in a library

To the university's database

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Search outside SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view