Includes bibliographical references (p. 169-197) and index.
Contents:
Introduction: Reason, ethics, and animals -- pt. 1. Making the rational case. Why animal suffering matters morally -- How we minimise animal suffering and how we can change -- pt. 2. Three practical critiques. First case : hunting with dogs -- Second case : fur farming -- Third case : commercial sealing -- Conclusion : re-establishing animals and children as a common cause, and six objections considered.
Summary:
Andrew Linzey, the father of 'animal theology' grounds his arguments not on "animal rights" or on a secondary moral significance to animals, but on man's ethical responsibility towards innocent, defenseless, and vulnerable animals who are considered different or lower than us. The irrational and linguistic deficiencies, the alleged lack of moral agency, or even self-awareness compared to mature humanity are rational grounds for ethical concern by the mere fact that their undeserved suffering cannot be assumed to be any less than human suffering, since the significance of their suffering must be reckoned in their own terms, not ours. His central point is that, we cannot continue to privilege human suffering, but we must recognize that even animal differences argue for treating them with the care and and concern we extend for our very young. Abused animals deserve special moral solicitude just as abused infants do who, though dependent on us for their welfare, can neither articulate or represent themselves.
This resource is supported by the Institute of Museum and Library Services under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act as administered by State Library of Iowa.