Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Transactionism, Dominionism, and Moral Exceptionalism in Animal Ethics

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Contemporary Pragmatism

I advocate an animal ethics view of moral exceptionalism, which can serve as an alternative to what I call transactionism and dominionism. In transactionism, there is stress upon the mutually defining relationships between human and nonhuman animals. In dominionism, there is a belief that humans are fundamentally different from animals and yet are duty-bound to take care of them – at least to some extent. Moral exceptionalism is based on a recognition that humans have a tendency to kill animals while still being friends with them, or kill animals because they believe animals have less moral worth. Appropriate respect for animals, as well as any kind of superiority over them, means that humans have exceptional duties toward the preservation of life, duties which many animals cannot themselves follow. Moral exceptionalism agrees with a pragmatist understanding of the interconnectedness of humans and nonhumans – one promoted by recent authors such as Erin McKenna and Cynthia Willett – but simply holds humans to a higher moral standard with regard to the act of killing.

Affiliations: 1: Associate Professor of Philosophy, St. Ambrose University, rueteniktaddl@sau.edu

10.1163/18758185-01302005
/content/journals/10.1163/18758185-01302005
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18758185-01302005
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Emerson Ralph Waldo. 1991. “"Fate"” in Heritage of American Literature: Volume I . New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
2. James William. 2000. “"Is Life Worth Living?",” in Pragmatism and Other Writings . New York: Penguin Books.
3. Lewis C. S. 1976. The Problem of Pain . New York: MacMillan.
4. Linzey Andrew. 2009. Creatures of the Same God: Explorations in Animal Theology . New York: Lantern Books.
5. McKenna Erin. 2013. Pets, People and Pragmatism . New York: Fordham University Press.
6. Scully Matthew. 2002. Dominion: The Power of Man, The Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy . New York: St. Martin’s Press.
7. Smith Wesley J. 2010. A Dog is a Pig is a Rat is a Boy: The Human Cost of the Animal Rights Movement . New York: Encounter Books.
8. Pollan Michael. 2007. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals . New York: Penguin.
9. Willett Cynthia. Interspecies Ethics . 2014. New York: Columbia University Press.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/18758185-01302005
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18758185-01302005
2016-07-15
2018-06-19

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Contemporary Pragmatism — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation