Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory

John Hadley

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    9 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    J. Baird Callicott's claim to have unified environmentalism and animal liberation should be rejected by holists and liberationists. By making relations of intimacy necessary for moral considerability, Callicott excludes from the moral community nonhuman animals unable to engage in intimate relations due to the circumstances of their confinement. By failing to afford moral protection to animals in factory farms and research laboratories, Callicott's biosocial moral theory falls short of meeting a basic moral demand of liberationists. Moreover, were Callicott to include factory farm and research animals inside the moral community by affording them universal or non-communitarian rights, his theory would fall foul of environmentalists who seek to promote ecosystem stability and integrity via therapeutic hunting. If factory farm and research animals can have rights irrespective of their particular circumstances, then so can free- roaming animals from overabundant and exotic species.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)67-78
    Number of pages12
    JournalEthics and the Environment
    Volume12
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - 2007

    Fingerprint

    animal
    farm
    environmentalism
    hunting
    Animals
    Moral Theory
    Farm
    Factory
    ecosystem
    Moral Community
    rights
    Nonhuman Animals
    Rights Theory
    Animal Liberation
    Ecosystem
    Intimacy
    Integrity
    Hunting
    Therapeutics
    Environmentalism

    Cite this

    Hadley, John. / Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory. In: Ethics and the Environment. 2007 ; Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 67-78.
    @article{a214c42db6d844bb825d43617dd636ab,
    title = "Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory",
    abstract = "J. Baird Callicott's claim to have unified environmentalism and animal liberation should be rejected by holists and liberationists. By making relations of intimacy necessary for moral considerability, Callicott excludes from the moral community nonhuman animals unable to engage in intimate relations due to the circumstances of their confinement. By failing to afford moral protection to animals in factory farms and research laboratories, Callicott's biosocial moral theory falls short of meeting a basic moral demand of liberationists. Moreover, were Callicott to include factory farm and research animals inside the moral community by affording them universal or non-communitarian rights, his theory would fall foul of environmentalists who seek to promote ecosystem stability and integrity via therapeutic hunting. If factory farm and research animals can have rights irrespective of their particular circumstances, then so can free- roaming animals from overabundant and exotic species.",
    keywords = "Open access version available, Animal liberation, Callicott, Ecological holism, Environmental ethics",
    author = "John Hadley",
    note = "Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = Spring 2007; Journal title (773t) = Ethics and the Environment. ISSNs: 1085-6633;",
    year = "2007",
    language = "English",
    volume = "12",
    pages = "67--78",
    journal = "Ethics and the Environment",
    issn = "1085-6633",
    publisher = "Indiana University Press",
    number = "1",

    }

    Hadley, J 2007, 'Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory', Ethics and the Environment, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 67-78.

    Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory. / Hadley, John.

    In: Ethics and the Environment, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2007, p. 67-78.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Critique of Callicott's Biosocial Moral Theory

    AU - Hadley, John

    N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = Spring 2007; Journal title (773t) = Ethics and the Environment. ISSNs: 1085-6633;

    PY - 2007

    Y1 - 2007

    N2 - J. Baird Callicott's claim to have unified environmentalism and animal liberation should be rejected by holists and liberationists. By making relations of intimacy necessary for moral considerability, Callicott excludes from the moral community nonhuman animals unable to engage in intimate relations due to the circumstances of their confinement. By failing to afford moral protection to animals in factory farms and research laboratories, Callicott's biosocial moral theory falls short of meeting a basic moral demand of liberationists. Moreover, were Callicott to include factory farm and research animals inside the moral community by affording them universal or non-communitarian rights, his theory would fall foul of environmentalists who seek to promote ecosystem stability and integrity via therapeutic hunting. If factory farm and research animals can have rights irrespective of their particular circumstances, then so can free- roaming animals from overabundant and exotic species.

    AB - J. Baird Callicott's claim to have unified environmentalism and animal liberation should be rejected by holists and liberationists. By making relations of intimacy necessary for moral considerability, Callicott excludes from the moral community nonhuman animals unable to engage in intimate relations due to the circumstances of their confinement. By failing to afford moral protection to animals in factory farms and research laboratories, Callicott's biosocial moral theory falls short of meeting a basic moral demand of liberationists. Moreover, were Callicott to include factory farm and research animals inside the moral community by affording them universal or non-communitarian rights, his theory would fall foul of environmentalists who seek to promote ecosystem stability and integrity via therapeutic hunting. If factory farm and research animals can have rights irrespective of their particular circumstances, then so can free- roaming animals from overabundant and exotic species.

    KW - Open access version available

    KW - Animal liberation

    KW - Callicott

    KW - Ecological holism

    KW - Environmental ethics

    M3 - Article

    VL - 12

    SP - 67

    EP - 78

    JO - Ethics and the Environment

    JF - Ethics and the Environment

    SN - 1085-6633

    IS - 1

    ER -