Abstract
In Just Fodder, Milburn argues for a relational account of our duties to animals. Following Clare Palmer, he argues that, though all animals have negative rights that we have a duty not to violate, we only gain positive obligations towards animals in the contexts of our relationships with them, which can be personal or political. He argues that human beings have collective positive duties towards domesticated animals, in virtue of the kind of relationship between us established by domestication. However, when it comes to wild animals, he argues that we have no such morally relevant relationships, and so we have only negative duties towards them. I argue that throughout history and even prehistory human beings have morally entangled themselves with wild animals sufficiently that we may in fact have collective positive duties towards many, if not all, wild animals.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 15 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Food Ethics |
Volume | 8 |
Issue number | 2 |
Early online date | 10 Jun 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Oct 2023 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2023, The Author(s).
Keywords
- Animal ethics
- Environmental ethics
- Just fodder
- Wild animal suffering