Ethics and Animals
Spring, 2018
MWF
1-1:50
Bowman
202
Professor: Dr. David K. Braden-Johnson
Department: Philosophy, Interdisciplinary Studies,
and Modern Languages
Office: Office #2, 100 Porter Street
Office Hours: MWF 2-3
Phone: (413)
662-5448
Required
Text: Lori Gruen, Ethics and
Animals: An Introduction. All other
readings in handout form or online.
Focus of Course
Ethics
We
all subscribe, at any point in time, to a certain set of moral propositions (only
some of which we can readily articulate). For example, someone might hold to
all of the following (moral/ethical/normative) views:
(1)
Tolerance is always a good thing.
(2) Late-term abortions are wrong.
(3) Suicide should be viewed as simply a matter of personal choice.
(4) Sexual harassment is never excusable.
(5) Eating turkey on Thanksgiving is a harmless tradition.
(6) Killing whales for profit is inhumane and should be illegal.
(2) Late-term abortions are wrong.
(3) Suicide should be viewed as simply a matter of personal choice.
(4) Sexual harassment is never excusable.
(5) Eating turkey on Thanksgiving is a harmless tradition.
(6) Killing whales for profit is inhumane and should be illegal.
It
is important to note that ethics is not a unique form of reasoning; rather, it involves
giving moral reasons to support the moral positions/beliefs/claims we actually
hold or assert. Ethics therefore entails
a number of questions: Are our reasons objective? That is, do they hold true for all persons in
relevantly similar situations? Or could
our moral reasons be reducible to custom (cultural relativism), to subjective
feelings (emotivism), to self-interest (egoism), or to religion (theism)? What is the role of consistency or coherence
in ethics? Should the defender of (1) tolerate someone else's defense of sexual
harassment or third-trimester abortion?
Can the defender of (5) make (rational) sense of his or her commitment
to (2) or (6)? Is there an
intellectually responsible escape from these concerns in some variety of
“relativistic,” contextual, or “personal” ethics?
Who matters?
Which
species of animals on earth matter to humans (or have value of some sort to or for us); or, on the assumption that human
valuations often reflect the value that inheres to objects, have value to or in
themselves (i.e., "intrinsic" value)? These very general axiological (value-based)
questions will serve as the starting point for our consideration of the proper range of human (moral or ethical)
valuations. Of course, the earth and at
least some of its creatures do matter to some extent to all of us, as we
naturally include ourselves and/or our interests and companion/favorite animals
among those most valued objects.
(over)
How much do they matter?
Therefore,
the real question we must ask is this: How
much ought these living beings (including humans) matter to us and why? In other words: What is the proper degree of respect due these
others? Can we identify a universal set
of basic moral obligations to (some part of) the animal world, or will these
obligations vary along cultural, ethnic, geographical, racial, historical, or
gender-based lines? And, given certain
inevitable conflicts that will arise within any coherent set of valuations,
what kinds of tradeoffs are we justified in making? Given, for example, certain morally relevant
similarities between many human and nonhuman animals, are we ever morally
justified in advocating or engaging in forms of scientific experimentation on
nonhumans that are designed to benefit humans alone?
The ethics of
use
Most
generally, is the human use or consumption,
in various ways, of sentient (or conscious, or self-aware) yet nonhuman life
consistent with a recognition of the special kind of value (assuming there be
such -- here we can raise the specter of the proper valuation of non-animal
life or even non-living entities, though environmental ethics will not be our
main focus) that attaches to these living beings? Or might we identify some morally relevant
difference (or set of differences) between humans and all other creatures that are
sufficient to justify current human consumptive practices (namely, the use
nonhuman animals for food, clothing, or medical, sport, and entertainment
purposes)?
Online
Activities
My main blog listed above contains
links to all supporting course handouts and assignments, including a
noninteractive blog-page that lists weekly reading/writing assignments for this
course (“Ethics & Animals”). Since I
prefer to devote class-time to the exposition and analysis of student and
textual positions, I typically reserve my own frequently evolving views for
this online medium.
Class Po licies and Expectations
Carefully review Handout CL
and Matt Silliman’s short essay, designed for honors students but to my mind
applicable to good students everywhere, “What Makes Honors Students Honorable?”
in Thesis XII (http://thesisxii.blogspot.com). Maintaining civility and openness is especially
important – and at times challenging – in this context. Our discussions and readings will involve
unpleasant (often ignored) facts about human-animal relations and contentious
moral theories, many of which explicitly condemn the commonplace, traditional,
or seemingly innocuous daily activities of the vast majority of humanity. Therefore, our task is to carve out a safe,
productive, intellectually engaging space for the careful consideration of
these facts and theories about our relations to nonhuman others. This is decidedly not the time for moralizing
(“Well, if you want to be a better person…”), proselytizing (“Animals are
people, too; end of story!”), or the defensive promotion of one’s long-held
view (“Animals have been eating each other since the dawn of time.…”).
Cancellations
I
will attempt to email the entire class to warn of any unanticipated
cancellations.
Laptop Policy
Like a concert
hall or theater, our classroom is reserved for face-to-face interaction. Thus,
barring special needs or circumstances, you may bring but not use your
laptop during class. The same policy applies to cell phones, IPods, and all
other distracting gadgets. Please print out in advance any electronic material
required for class.
Examinations
There will be no examinations in this
course.
Q&As
Every
two weeks, students will complete short, highly-polished, critical (See Handouts CR1, CR2, and CR3) writing
assignments (typically based on a specific reading from our text) called
“Q&As” (see Handout QAHO).
My
grading policy is, therefore, transparent and simple, based solely on the
scores of your Q&As. (See Handouts
QAHO and CL, “grading”).