How to Ground Animal Rights on African Values: A Reply to Horsthemke

Journal of Animal Ethics 7 (2):163-174 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I seek to advance plausible replies to the several criticisms Kai Horsthemke makes of ‘African Modal Relationalism’, his label for my theory of animal rights with a sub-Saharan pedigree. Central to this view is the claim that, roughly, a being has a greater moral status, the more it is in principle capable of relating communally with characteristic human beings. Horsthemke maintains that this view is anthropocentric and speciesist, is poorly motivated relative to his egalitarian-individualist approach, and does not have the implications that I contend. I aim to rebut these and related criticisms, contending that African Modal Relationalism is in fact a promising way to philosophically ground animal rights.

Other Versions

reprint Metz, Thaddeus (2017) "How to Ground Animal Rights on African Values: A Constructive Approach (repr.)". In Chimakonam, Jonathan O., African Philosophy and Environmental Conservation, pp. 30-41: Routledge (2017)

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-11-01

Downloads
443 (#68,212)

6 months
88 (#72,716)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Thaddeus Metz
Cornell University (PhD)

References found in this work

Two distinctions in goodness.Christine M. Korsgaard - 1983 - Philosophical Review 92 (2):169-195.
Ubuntu as a Moral Theory and Human Rights in South Africa.Thaddeus Metz - 2011 - African Human Rights Law Journal 11 (2):532-559.
Rethinking intrinsic value.Shelly Kagan - 1998 - The Journal of Ethics 2 (4):277-297.
II-A Distinction in Value: Intrinsic and For Its Own Sake.Wlodek Rabinowicz & Toni Rønnow-Rasmussen - 1999 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):33-51.

View all 21 references / Add more references