| Popis: |
IntroductionThis special issue of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiryfocuses on animal ethics and various intersectionsamongst human and nonhuman animals. Interest innonhuman animals and their moral status is well-established internationally, and human interdependencewith nonhumans is now at the forefront of political,socioeconomic, and medical agendas in most countriesaround the world—where people and animals are in-creasinglyregardedeitherasthreatsorsourcesofbenefitin relation to one another. The nonhuman animal hasbecome, therefore, the centre of inquiry and debate inthe study of philosophy, literature, history, visual art,cultural studies, sociology, geography, environment,and religion.Against this background, it is perhaps surprising thatnonhuman animals remain on the fringe of bioethics. Inan extended critique on the state of contemporary bio-ethics, Cary Wolfe (2010) contends that modern bioeth-ics is riddled with prejudices and “pragmatic expedien-cies” that have emptied bioethical discussion of nonhu-mananimalsandwhyandhowweshouldtakethemintoaccount in our moral decisions:Of these prejudices, none is more symptomatic ofthe current state of bioethics than prejudice basedonspeciesdifference,andanincapacitytoaddressthe ethical issues raised by dramatic changes overthe past thirty years in our knowledge about thelives, communication, emotions, and conscious-ness of a number of nonhuman species—apreju-dice that bioethics shares with the very core of acenturies-old humanism (Wolfe 2010,56).One might conclude from Wolf’sdiscussionthattheexclusion of nonhuman animals from bioethics dis-course reflects a kind of fundamentalism that takesanthropocentrism as an order of nature in which humanparadigmsformthebasisofasinglepointoforientationand the only reference point for moral consideration.Thisisnottoarguethatconcernwiththemoralstatusof nonhuman animals and our relationships with themhave lost their vigour. While bioethics experienced anepistemological shift—becoming “reissued” as whatcould be described as biomedical bioethics—animalethics has beenpursued and developed under a separateheading. A Google search of the phrase “animal ethics”undertaken by the authors in July 2013 yielded31,700,000 hits, while the term “bioethics” yielded6,863,000. Indeed the examination of animal ethicshas generated sophisticated philosophical discussion ofthemoralstatusofnonhumananimalsandenhancedourunderstanding of animal capacities (Beauchamp andFrey 2011; Armstrong and Botzler 2008).From both within the discipline (Gruen and Ruddick2009;Pierce2009; Potter 1996, 2001; Reich 1995;Whitehouse 2003) and without (Wolfe 2010;Ehrlich2009), orthodox bioethics has been criticized for beingtoo narrowly conceived and medically oriented. Whilewe agree with the overall conclusion of theseauthors, we must be careful not to make sweeping |
Full text from SpringerLink