• Admin
    UC Research Repository
    View Item 
       
    • UC Home
    • Library
    • UC Research Repository
    • College of Arts
    • Arts: Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
       
    • UC Home
    • Library
    • UC Research Repository
    • College of Arts
    • Arts: Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of the RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Should We Make A Social Contract With Animals?

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    thesis_fulltext.pdf (783.8Kb)
    Saunders_Use_of_thesis_form.pdf (94.08Kb)
    Author
    Saunders, M
    Date
    2010
    Permanent Link
    http://hdl.handle.net/10092/8103
    Thesis Discipline
    Philosophy
    Degree Grantor
    University of Canterbury
    Degree Level
    Masters
    Degree Name
    Master of Arts

    The thesis is divided into two parts. In the first part, Mark Rowlands’ Neo-Rawlsianism is outlined and discussed as an application of social contract theory to animal ethics. It is shown that we can make a social contract with animals, and that there is nothing ridiculous about the idea. It is even shown that animals should (in principle) participate in negotiating a social contract (if we make one). Rowlands’ argument for vegetarianism is outlined as an example of how his Neo-Rawlsianism is applied. This argument relies to some extent on the claim that animals are harmed by a painless death, and an attempt is made to support this claim. But it is ultimately argued that Rowlands’ Neo-Rawlsianism falls foul of a reductio ad absurdum that puts it out of contention, thus implying that we should not make a social contract with animals.

    In the second part of the thesis, Tzachi Zamir’s approach to animal ethics is outlined and discussed as a minimalist approach. Zamir proposes a Speciesist-Liberationism. This is explained, and it is shown how it avoids the reductio ad absurdum Neo-Rawlsianism falls foul of. Zamir’s argument for vegetarianism is outlined as an example of how his Minimalism is applied. Various weaknesses are observed in Zamir’s argument, and a more minimal Minimalism is suggested as providing the best argument for vegetarianism and animal liberation, at least until a better substantive moral argument is found.

    Subjects
    Animal Ethics
    Collections
    • Arts: Theses and Dissertations [1446]
    Rights
    http://library.canterbury.ac.nz/thesis/etheses_copyright.shtml

    UC Research Repository
    University Library
    University of Canterbury
    Private Bag 4800
    Christchurch 8140

    Phone
    364 2987 ext 8718

    Email
    ucresearchrepository@canterbury.ac.nz

    Follow us
    FacebookTwitterYoutube

    © University of Canterbury Library
    Send Feedback | Contact Us