1,802 research outputs found
Tom Regan on Kind Arguments against Animal Rights and for Human Rights
Tom Regan argues that human beings and some non-human animals have moral rights because they are âsubjects of lives,â that is, roughly, conscious, sentient beings with an experiential welfare. A prominent critic, Carl Cohen, objects: he argues that only moral agents have rights and so animals, since they are not moral agents, lack
rights. An objection to Cohenâs argument is that his theory of rights seems to imply that human beings who are not moral agents have no moral rights, but since these human beings have rights, his theory of rights is false, and so he fails to show that animals lack rights. Cohen responds that this objection fails because human beings who are not moral agents nevertheless are the âkindâ of beings who are moral agents and so have rights, but animals are not that âkindâ of being and so lack rights. Regan argues that Cohenâs âkindâ arguments fail: they fail to explain why human beings who are not moral agents have rights and they fail to show that animals lack rights.
Since Cohenâs âkindâ arguments are influential, I review and critique Reganâs objections . I offer suggestions for stronger responses to arguments like Cohenâs
Ethical Egoism
Selfishness is often considered a vice and selfish actions are often judged to be wrong. But sometimes we ought to do whatâs best for ourselves: in a sense, we sometimes should be selfish.
The ethical theory known as ethical egoism states that we are always morally required to do whatâs in our own self-interest. The view isnât that we are selfishâthis is psychological egoismâbut that we ought to be.
This essay explores ethical egoism and the main arguments for and against it.
[Note: there are links for two versions below; a 1000 Word Philosophy version and a longer version in "Introduction to Ethics: An Open Educational Resource"
Thinking Critically About Abortion
An editorial / opinion piece on abortion:
"Iâm a philosophy professor who specializes in medical ethics and I teach and write about the ethics of abortion. So I am very familiar with the medical, legal and â most importantly â ethical or moral issues related to HB 481, the so-called âheartbeat billâ that would effectively ban abortion in Georgia. At least hundreds of other philosophy, ethics and law professors in Georgia teach these ethical debates about abortion: they are also, to varying degrees, experts on the issues.
What is taught is the arguments about the ethics of abortion, that is, the reasons to think that abortion is wrong and the reasons to think that itâs not wrong. Evaluating these arguments requires understanding and skill. Much of these skills amount to consistently asking âWhat do you mean?â and âWhy think that?â We need better arguments on these issues, and asking and answering these questions helps with that. . .
Euthanasia, or Mercy Killing
Sadly, there are people in very bad medical conditions who want to die. They are in pain, they are suffering, and they no longer find their quality of life to be at an acceptable level anymore.
When people like this are kept alive by machines or other medical treatments, can it be morally permissible to let them die?
Advocates of âpassive euthanasiaâ argue that it can be. Their reasons, however, suggest that it can sometimes be not wrong to actively kill some patients, i.e., that âactive euthanasiaâ can be permissible also. This essay reviews these arguments
Early and Later Abortions: Ethics and Law
Most abortions occur early in pregnancy. I argue that these abortions, and so most abortions, are not morally wrong and that the best arguments given to think that these abortions are wrong are weak. I also argue that these abortions, and probably all abortions, should be legal.
I begin by observing that people sometimes respond to the issue by describing the circumstances of abortion, not offering reasons for their views about those circumstances; I then dismiss âquestion-beggingâ arguments about abortion that merely assume the conclusions they are given to support; most importantly, I evaluate many arguments: both common, often-heard arguments and arguments developed by philosophers.
My defense of abortion is based on facts about early fetusesâ not yet possessing consciousness or any mental life, awareness or feeling, as well as concerns about rights to oneâs own body
Arabis recta Vill. (Brassicaceae) in Poland : distribution, habitats and threat assessment
Arabis recta is one of the rarest species in Poland. It has been reported from 15 sites, mostly in the Nida Basin (MaĆopolska Upland). The plant is a component of xerothermic grasslands but it can also grow in arable fields and fallows. In Poland, Arabis recta is considered to be threatened by natural succession and herbicide use. However, according to recent studies, it should be treated as an endangered species (EN category) in the country
Responding to Morally Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies
Many historically-influential philosophers had profoundly wrong moral views or behaved very badly. Aristotle thought women were âdeformed menâ and that some people were slaves âby nature.â Descartes had disturbing views about non-human animals. Hume and Kant were racists. Hegel disparaged Africans. Nietzsche despised sick people. Mill condoned colonialism. Fanon was homophobic. Frege was anti-Semitic; Heidegger was a Nazi. Schopenhauer was sexist. Rousseau abandoned his children. Wittgenstein beat his young students. Unfortunately, these examples are just a start.
These philosophers are famous for their intellectual accomplishments, yet they display serious moral or intellectual flaws in their beliefs or actions. At least, some of their views were false, ultimately unjustified and, perhaps, harmful.
How should we respond to brilliant-but-flawed philosophers from the past? Here we explore the issues, asking questions and offering few answers. Any insights gained here might be applicable to contemporary imperfect philosophers, scholars in other fields, and people in general
New localities of Viola stagnina in Poland
Viola stagnina Kit. is a species regarded as a river corridor plant because of its confinement to river valleys in Central Europe. It is a component of alluvial meadows with natural flooding regime (Cnidion dubii alliance). V. stagnina is rare and red-listed in some European countries. Seven new localities of V. stagnina, its distribution map in Poland and information about possible methods of protecting the species are presented
New localities of Rosa gallica (Rosaceae) in Southern Poland
The paper presents new records for rare and endangered species - Rosa gallica L. from southern Poland. At each of the new stations french rose occupies secondary, anthropogenic habitats. Distribution map and habitat preferences of the studied species are provided
- âŠ