Situation Ethics and Animals

Situation Ethics and Animals

1. Views

   • No clear guidance
   • Should the working principles be extended to include animals? If so, how do they apply?
   • One of the 4 presuppositions is personalism
     • Even if animals are given moral consideration, HUMAN NEEDS AND INTERESTS TAKE PRIORITY

2. Personalism would seem to justify prioritising human needs (BOTH POINTS ARE ANTHROPOCENTRIC)

   • Some argue intensive farming could be increased to address global hunger
   • Others may denounce intensive farming as short-term thinking and propose a reduction in meat production and an increases in arable farming of crops for human use

3. The working principle that the end justifies the means could be used in support of animal testing for medical treatments and acquiring greater understanding of diseases

   • Fletcher saw animal testing as PROMOTING HUMAN WELFARE AND SAVING LIVES
   • Simultaneously the demands of agape would mean there should be MINIMUM suffering for animals involved

4. Fletcher was involved in cloning research, so clearly supported it

   • In response to concerns, he described it as 'sinning bravely'

5. Situation ethics would seem to be opposed to the use of animals in blood sports

   • Agape demands compassion NOT CRUELTY
   • Potential desensitising of humans may lead to lack of agape

6. Personalism would seem to support xenotransplantation

   • Potential for helping vast numbers of humans might be seen as applying 'a vast scale of agapeic calculus' (as Fletcher would say)
   • Transplanting human cancerous materials into animals would be justified as promoting agape on a huge scale
   • TAKING RISKS ARISING OUT OF TRANSPLANTING PIGS HEARTS INTO HUMANS WOULD BE JUSTIFIED ON THE GROUNDS OF 'SINNING BRAVELY'

7. A situationist who took the approach that animals have exactly the same right as humans to moral consideration and to agape would reject all four uses of animals