Rawls and the Distribution of Human Resources By Those in the Animal Rights Community

International Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (2):251-266 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Until now, arguments for the distribution of resources by those who care about the plight of human-used animals have been either utilitarian or libertarian in nature. The utilitarian case has been made in writing by both activists and philosophers. The libertarian case is more a position that I have found comes naturally to many in the animal movement. In this article I make use of elements of Rawls’ A Theory of Justice to make a case for two principles of justice for the distribution of human resources by those in the animal rights community. My argument arises within the tradition of Tom Regan and Marc Rowlands where animals are held to possess negative rights. This is an argument largely by analogy to Rawls’ manner of making a case for his two principles.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Rawlsian resources for animal ethics.Ruth Abbey - 2007 - Ethics and the Environment 12 (1):1-22.
Human rights without foundations.Joseph Raz - 2010 - In J. Tasioulas & S. Besson (eds.), The Philosphy of International Law. Oxford University Press.
Human Rights and Toleration in Rawls.Mitch Avila - 2011 - Human Rights Review 12 (1):1-14.
Animal rights: moral theory and practice.Mark Rowlands - 2009 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-11-26

Downloads
30 (#535,608)

6 months
9 (#315,924)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references