Search

Summary

This chapter assesses priority arguments against intervention in nature. First, on the Exclusion Approach, intervention is not a priority because equality and priority reasons simply do not apply to wild animals. Second, on the Deflation Approach, since nonhuman animals have a lower capacity for well-being, increasing wild animal well-being produces less value than increasing human well-being. Third, on the Perfectionist Approach, increases in nonhuman well-being cannot compensate for the loss of “the best things in life,” only attainable by human activity. We should, thus, give priority to increases in human well-being that ensure the existence of excellent goods. It is argued that all approaches have highly unacceptable results, particularly on the negative scale of well-being. Finally, the chapter considers the Domesticated Animals First objection, according to which priority should be given to alleviating the harms suffered by domesticated animals. It is argued that taken either as a substantive or as a strategic objection, it cannot soundly succeed.

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

1 results

Chapter 7 - Priority

Summary

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

Save Search

1 results

Chapter 7 - Priority

Summary