Three Revisionary Implications of Buddhist Animal Ethics

Philosophy East and West 74 (4):595-616 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many accept the following three theses in animal ethics. First, although animal welfare should not be—or at least, need not be—our top moral priority, it is not a trivial one either. Second, if an animal is sentient, then it is a moral patient. Third, the extinction of an animal species is a tragic outcome that we have moral reason to prevent. I argue that a traditional (i.e., pre-modern) Buddhist perspective pushes against the first thesis and that a naturalized Buddhist perspective is inconsistent with the latter two.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,748

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-01-06

Downloads
106 (#209,470)

6 months
26 (#125,448)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Calvin Baker
Princeton University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references