The pitfalls of qualified moral veganism. A critique of Jan Deckers' holistic health approach to animal ethics

Article English OPEN
Paez, Eze;
(2017)
  • Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1111/jep.12786/full, doi: 10.1111/jep.12786
  • Subject: Veganism | Science & Technology | Jan Deckers | Speciesism | :Filosofia, Ética e Religião [Humanidades] | Pan-Sentientism | Animal Ethics | Holistic Health

I critically examine Jan Deckers' position in Animal (De)liberation, where he defends two main views. The first is "qualified moral veganism": Most humans have a duty to abstain from consuming animal products, even if there are circumstances in which doing so is justifi... View more
  • References (9)

    1. Deckers J. Animal (De)liberation: Should the Consumption of Animal Products be Banned. London: Ubiquity Press; 2016.

    2. Deckers J. What policy should be adopted to curtail the negative global health impacts associated with the consumption of farmed animal products? Res Publica. 2010;16 (1): 57-72.

    3. Deckers J. Negative 'GHIs', the right to health protection, and future generations. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. 2011; 8 (2): 165-76.

    4. Deckers J. In defence of the vegan project. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. 2013 10 (2):187-95.

    5. Whitehead A. Process and Reality. An Essay in Cosmology (Corrected Edition by David Griffin and Donald Sherburne). New York, NY: The Free Press; 1978.

    6. Baluška F., Mancuso S., Volkmann D. & Barlow P. W. The “root-brain” hypothesis of Charles and Francis Darwin: Revival after more than 125 years. Plant Signaling & Behavior. 2009 4 (12): 1121-1127.

    7. Cochrane A. Animal rights without liberation. Applied ethics and human obligations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 2012.

    8. Singer P. Animal Liberation. London: Vintage Digital; 2015 [1975].

    9. Regan T. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley, California: University of California Press; 2004 [1983].

  • Metrics
Share - Bookmark