Description
Book SynopsisAre animals worthy recipients of justice? If so, what do we owe them, and what is to be gained by using the language of justice when considering our duties toward them? A Theory of Justice for Animals, written by one of the foremost scholars of animal ethics, argues that not only are animals worthy recipients of justice, but that the language of justice offers a stronger base of claims for animal advocates than does the language of ethics or morality. It also claims that a genuinely political theory of animal rights is incomplete if it does not go beyond the level of ideal theory. This is the first account of animal ethics to use nonideal theory, and it does so to plot a course from where we are now to where we want to be. Advancing what he calls the enhanced sentience position, Robert Garner argues that a valid theory of justice for animals should be rights-based, and that animals have a right to not suffer at the hands of humans. At the same time, he argues that humans have a greater
Trade ReviewAs a welcome defence of animal rights, Garner's book is among the leading accounts of justice for animals and a powerful, practical weapon against the injustices our species inflicts upon so many suffering animals. * Jeffrey Spring, Political Studies Review *
In this highly anticipated book, Robert Garner presents a clear and persuasive new theory of justice for animals. Because the theory aims to be feasible, and attuned to what can be achieved given the realities of our societies, the book is required reading for all those interested in the future of animal protection. * Alasdair Cochrane, Lecturer in Political Theory, University of Sheffield *
Table of Contents1. Introduction - Animals, Justice and Nonideal Theory ; 2. Contractarianism, Animals and Justice ; 3. Why Animals Need Justice ; 4. Indirect Duties, Virtue Ethics and Animals ; 5. The Animal Welfare Ethic ; 6. Animal Rights and Justice ; 7. Three Positions Rejected ; 8. Animal Rights as Ideal and Nonideal Theory ; 9. The Argument From Marginal Cases Revisited ; 10. Conclusion
