Tom Regan - Böcker

Described by Jeffrey Masson as "the single best introduction to animal rights ever written," this new book by Tom Regan will structure the animal rights debate for generations to come. In a style at once simple and elegant, Regan dispels the negative image of animal rights advocates perpetrated by the mass media, unmasks the fraudulent rhetoric of "humane treatment" favored by animal exploiters, and explains why existing laws function to legitimize institutional cruelty. Written by the leading philosophical spokesperson for animal rights, Tom Regan's shocking exposé of animal abuse makes an essential and lasting contribution that will significantly impact the history of animal rights advocacy in America.

A multifaceted response to the question,

More than twenty years after its original publication, The Case for Animal Rights is an acknowledged classic of moral philosophy, and its author is recognized as the intellectual leader of the animal rights movement. In a new and fully considered preface, Regan responds to his critics and defends the book's revolutionary position.

What gives an animal 'rights?' What makes product testing on animals wrong? In Animal Rights, Human Wrongs prominent activist and philosopher Tom Regan skillfully puts forth the argument for animal rights through the exploration of two questions central to moral theory: What makes an act right? What makes an act wrong? Taking into consideration moral theories such as contractarianism, utilitarianism, and Kantian ethics, Regan provides the theoretical framework that grounds a responsible pro-animal rights perspective, and ultimately explores how asking moral questions about other animals can lead to a better understanding of ourselves. The necessity of making a transition from moral theory to moral practice becomes startlingly clear as Reagan examines the commonplace, everyday choices that would be affected by believing in a moral theory that affirms the rights of animals. For the many people who have ever wondered "what difference does it make if animals have rights," Animal Rights, Humans Wrongs provides a provocative and intriguing answer. For a discussion of animal rights tailored to a more general audience, see Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003).

What gives an animal 'rights?' What makes product testing on animals wrong? In Animal Rights, Human Wrongs prominent activist and philosopher Tom Regan skillfully puts forth the argument for animal rights through the exploration of two questions central to moral theory: What makes an act right? What makes an act wrong? Taking into consideration moral theories such as contractarianism, utilitarianism, and Kantian ethics, Regan provides the theoretical framework that grounds a responsible pro-animal rights perspective, and ultimately explores how asking moral questions about other animals can lead to a better understanding of ourselves. The necessity of making a transition from moral theory to moral practice becomes startlingly clear as Reagan examines the commonplace, everyday choices that would be affected by believing in a moral theory that affirms the rights of animals. For the many people who have ever wondered "what difference does it make if animals have rights," Animal Rights, Humans Wrongs provides a provocative and intriguing answer. For a discussion of animal rights tailored to a more general audience, see Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003).

Do all animals have rights? Is it morally wrong to use mice or dogs in medical research, or rabbits and cows as food? How ought we resolve conflicts between the interests of humans and those of other animals? Philosophical inquiry is essential in addressing such questions; the answers given must have enormous practical importance. Here for the first time in the same volume, the animal rights debate is argued deeply and fully by the two most articulate and influential philosophers representing the opposing camps. Each makes his case in turn to the opposing case. The arguments meet head on: Are we humans morally justified in using animals as we do? A vexed and enduring controversy here receives its deepest and most eloquent exposition.

George Edward Moore is among this century's most influential philosophers. Perhaps best known for his \u0022defense of common sense,\u0022 he also made important contributions to metaphysics and theory of knowledge. But it is in ethics, and especially owing to the positions he develops in his Principia Ethica, first published in 1903, that his ideas have had their most enduring influence. A forerunner to this famous work, The Elements of Ethics is a series of ten unpublished lectures that were presented by Moore, then in his mid-twenties. The Elements shows that Principia Ethica did not spring fully-formed from Moore's pen but evolved slowly over time. In these lectures, Moore begins with the same question he asks in Principia Ethica: What is Good? Importantly, his answer is the same one he offers in Principia and many of its supporting arguments also appear, though sometimes in embryonic form. Moreover, in these lectures we also find sustained critiques of those who commit the \u0022naturalistic fallacy,\u0022 and of John Stuart Mill's commission of it in particular.In The Elements, however, Moore's position regarding ethics in relation to conduct differs in important respects from the one presented in Principia, and the former work contains important discussions, ranging from Christian ethics and the possibility of free will, not found in the latter.