•  292
    Taking humanism seriously: ``Obligatory'' anthropocentrism (review)
    Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4): 181-203. 2000.
    Humanism – in the sense that humans alonehave moral standing, or else a surpassing degree of it– has traditionally dominated all of ethicaldiscourse. However, its past formulations havesuccumbed to the temptation merely to stipulate sucha criterion, such as rationality, which nonhumans areoften deemed (without sufficient argument) to failwithout exception. Animal liberationistarguments do exist in counterpoint to traditionalhumanism, but one current difficulty seems to be asimple clash of basic …Read more
  •  100
    Can the treatment of animals be compared to the holocaust?
    Ethics and the Environment 11 (1): 97-132. 2006.
    : The treatment of animals and the Holocaust have been compared many times before, but never has a thoroughly detailed comparison been offered. A thirty-nine-point comparison can be constructed, whether or not one believes that animals are oppressed. The question of whether or not the comparison ought to be expressed merely brings into question whether animal liberationists have liberal-democratic rights to express themselves, which they surely do. Four objections are considered: Is the comparis…Read more
  •  63
    Animal rights: Autonomy and redundancy (review)
    Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (3): 259-273. 2001.
    Even if animal liberation were to be adopted, would rights for animals be redundant – or even deleterious? Such an objection, most prominently voiced by L. W. Sumner and Paul W. Taylor, is misguided, risks an anthropocentric and anthropomorphic conception of autonomy and freedom, overly agent-centered rights conceptions, and an overlooking of the likely harmful consequences of positing rights for humans but not for nonhuman animals. The objection in question also stems from an overly pessimistic…Read more
  •  30
    Response to Evelyn B. Pluhar's ``non-obligatory anthropocentrism''
    Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4): 337-340. 2000.
  •  30
    Marxism and Animal Rights
    Ethics and the Environment 2 (2). 1997.
    There is no doubt that Marx and Engels rejected animal rights. However, they did embrace the communist principle, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his need." Furthermore, they acknowledged that nonhuman animals have needs. So the principle can enjoin us to respect animals' needs, even if they lack certain abilities (e.g., tool-making, perhaps even self-consciousness). I argue that it is essentially speciesist to restrict this principle to human beings, and that its acc…Read more
  •  3
    Can the Treatment of Animals Be Compared to the Holocaust?
    Ethics and the Environment 11 (1): 97-132. 2006.
    The treatment of animals and the Holocaust have been compared many times before, but never has a thoroughly detailed comparison been offered. A thirty-nine-point comparison can be constructed, whether or not one believes that animals are oppressed. The question of whether or not the comparison ought to be expressed merely brings into question whether animal liberationists have liberal-democratic rights to express themselves, which they surely do. Four objections are considered: Is the comparison…Read more
  • Distinguishing animal rights from animal welfare
    In Marc Bekoff & Carron A. Meaney (eds.), Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare, Greenwood Press. pp. 43--45. 1998.
  • Empathy and Rationality in Ethics
    Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada). 2000.
    The purpose of this dissertation is to present a new ethical theory, ethical empathism. Before introducing that view, it is necessary to assess the prospects of another, contrary outlook: anthropocentrism. The object is to construct the most convincing possible version of human-centredness in ethics. The idea of arguing that humans are, by and large, beings of greater value than nonhumans is explored. This idea, although more plausible than other anthropocentric views, is rejected as unempatheti…Read more