Is there a Rawlsian Argument for Animal Rights?
Mark Rowlands defends a Rawlsian argument for animal rights, according to which animals have rights because we would assign them rights when deciding on the principles of morality from behind a veil of ignorance. Rowlandss argument depends on a non-standard interpretation of the veil of ignorance,...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
[2016]
|
| Dans: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
Année: 2016, Volume: 19, Numéro: 4, Pages: 973-984 |
| RelBib Classification: | NCG Éthique de la création; Éthique environnementale VA Philosophie |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
John Rawls
B Mark Rowlands B Animal Rights B Contractualism |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1565748565 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20171127172300.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 171127s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10677-016-9702-0 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1565748565 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-576)495748560 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ495748560 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Svolba, David |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Is there a Rawlsian Argument for Animal Rights? |c David Svolba |
| 264 | 1 | |c [2016] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Mark Rowlands defends a Rawlsian argument for animal rights, according to which animals have rights because we would assign them rights when deciding on the principles of morality from behind a veil of ignorance. Rowlandss argument depends on a non-standard interpretation of the veil of ignorance, according to which we cannot know whether we are human or non-human on the other side of the veil. Rowlands claims that his interpretation of the veil is more consistent with a core commitment of Rawlsian justicethe intuitive equality principlethan either Rawls or his critics realize. Here I argue that Rawls is not committed to the intuitive equality principle, as Rowlands articulates it, and hence Rowlandss argument is in fact only superficially Rawlsian. Furthermore, Rowlandss intuitive equality principle is dubious on its own terms, and thus a poor principle on which to base a case for animal rights. | ||
| 601 | |a Argumentation | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Animal Rights | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Contractualism | |
| 650 | 4 | |a John Rawls | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Mark Rowlands | |
| 652 | |a NCG:VA | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Ethical theory and moral practice |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1998 |g 19(2016), 4, Seite 973-984 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320527093 |w (DE-600)2015306-5 |w (DE-576)104558555 |x 1572-8447 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:19 |g year:2016 |g number:4 |g pages:973-984 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-016-9702-0 |x Verlag |3 Volltext |
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-016-9702-0 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 19 |j 2016 |e 4 |h 973-984 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 2988311471 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1565748565 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20191104133405 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 171127||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| LOK | |0 936ln |0 1442053844 |a VA | ||
| LOK | |0 936ln |0 1442052988 |a NCG | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||