Should the lion eat straw like the ox? Animal ethics and the predation problem

1Citations
Citations of this article
4Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Stephen Clark’s article The Rights of Wild Things from 1979 was the starting point for the consideration in the animal ethics literature of the so-called ‘predation problem’. Clark examines the response of David George Ritchie to Henry Stephens Salt, the first writer who has argued explicitly in favor of animal rights. Ritchie attempts to demonstrate—via reductio ad absurdum—that animals cannot have rights, because granting them rights would oblige us to protect prey animals against predators that wrongly violate their rights. This article navigates the reader through the debate sparked off by Clarke’s article, with as final destination what I consider to be the best way to deal with the predation problem. I will successively discuss arguments against the predation reductio from Singer’s utilitarian approach, Regan’s deontological approach, Nussbaum’s capability approach, and Donaldson and Kymlicka’s political theory of animal rights.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Keulartz, J. (2021). Should the lion eat straw like the ox? Animal ethics and the predation problem. In International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics (Vol. 33, pp. 99–121). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63523-7_6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free