A key concept in animal ethics is that of speciesism, and that speciesism is – moral-de-los-animales-mas-alla-del-especismo-y-el-ecologismo/. Especismo Cero. K likes. Send Message. See more of Especismo Cero on Facebook. Log In. or Fundación Igualdad Animal · EligeVeganismo. A full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversible animal, than an infant of a day, a week or even.

Author: Dotaxe Kijas
Country: Venezuela
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Politics
Published (Last): 20 June 2010
Pages: 262
PDF File Size: 8.70 Mb
ePub File Size: 9.29 Mb
ISBN: 687-7-13592-635-4
Downloads: 86704
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Zolotaur

This cognitive condition can be called epistemic anthropocentrism. Companion to ethicsOxford: Animal welfare and human interestsMassachusetts: Pune India Pune India. He claimed that iv Epistemic anthropocentrism is either equivalent to moral anthropocentrism or implies it; v Epistemic anthropocentrism is justified; vi Therefore, moral anthropocentrism is justified. We did this by showing clear instances eepecismo non-anthropocentric speciesist treatment of nonhuman animals.

Your email address will not be published.

Great ape personhood especismk Great Ape Project. Anthropocentrism is the position according to which the interests of human beings should be favoured over the interests of nonhuman entities. Ryder was a member of a group of intellectuals in Oxford, England, the nascent animal rights community, now known as the Oxford Group. Rorty, Richard [].

Semana internacional de acción contra el especismo [30 de octubre al 5 de noviembre]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. The fact that human beings are subject to specific constraints in their understanding of the world because of the cognitive apparatus with which members of our species are typically endowed does not imply that they are justified in giving greater moral consideration to themselves, or to their interests. But since we have no evidence that such things are the case, we have no reasons to adhere to moral anthropocentrism on those grounds.

Please send us more if you are aware of some that do not appear in this list. He compares former racist attitudes and assumptions to their present-day speciesist counterparts. The use of reason in everyday lifeBelmont: This page was last edited on 28 Decemberat The time has come to act upon this logic.

  ASTM D2310 PDF

In the chapter “The one true tree of life” in The Blind Watchmakerhe argues that it is not only zoological taxonomy that is saved from awkward ambiguity by the extinction of intermediate forms, but also human ethics and law. Nel Noddingsthe American feminist, has criticized Singer’s concept of speciesism for being simplistic, and for failing to take into account the context of species preference, as concepts of racism and sexism have taken into account the context of discrimination against humans.

Valencia Spain Valencia Spain.

Since, however, it is possible to give arguments against it and many individuals have abandoned the position, it is indeed revisable. Yet these definitions are problematic.

In addition, it could also be the case that a certain position ii prescribed an unjustified disadvantageous consideration of members of a particular nonhuman species, though not of members of other nonhuman species.

Some particularly common refrains used to justify denying nonhuman animals rights are that they are not intelligent, they cannot talk, or they cannot reason about morality or perform contractual obligations.

Encyclopaedia of animal rights and animal welfareChicago: It seems that this person is being speciesist, insofar as she is favouring the members of a certain species nonhuman over the members eepecismo another nonhumanbased on an unjustified appeal to species membership or more accurately, on an unjustified appeal to her relation of sympathy towards especiemo members of certain species, namely, birds.

So how can we justify disregarding the interests or suffering of nonhuman animals?


If it is accepted as morally wrong to deliberately inflict suffering upon innocent human creatures, then it is only logical to also regard it aanimal wrong to inflict suffering on innocent individuals of other species.

Warsaw Poland Warsaw Poland. The only reason we can be comfortable with such a double standard is that the intermediates between humans and chimps are all dead. Contents 1 What is speciesism?


The equivocation now becomes apparent. The first assumption is that anthropocentrism and speciesism are equivalent concepts. Barnard Rynn Berry T. Putting Animals in Perspective, London, Routledge, This belief can involve starting with a premise anmial a certain feature of a being—such as being able to understand and participate in a political system in which one has a political representative—is relevant no matter the being’s species.

Moral, theory and practice2nd ed. Retrieved 2 December Jammu India Jammu India. Ideas that changed the worldDorling Kindersley. The second assumption is the inevitability of anthropocentrism, which would supposedly justify speciesism. As before, this position has not been explicitly endorsed especiso philosophers, though it is often presupposed in their arguments.

What Is Speciesism? – Ética más allá de la especie

None of the abovementioned attributes edpecismo in that regard. In other projects Wikiquote. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University [referencia: It is possible to conceive especlsmo position that would i prescribe an unjustified preferential consideration of members of a particular nonhuman species against members of others.

To determine whether speciesism is the cause of our resistance to giving rights to nonhuman animals, we can use the following heuristics: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Previous editions – Dia Mundial pelo Fim do Especismo

The first is that moral anthropocentrism is not equivalent to speciesism, but rather one possible kind of speciesist bias among many.

Essays in environmental philosophyAlbany: Paola Cavalieri writes that the current humanist paradigm is that only human beings are members of the moral community, and that all are worthy of equal protection.

Animal rights eapecismo human obligationsEnglewood Cliffs: