Meat provocation - can animal ethics actually rest on rational arguments?
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11240%2F21%3A10429415" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11240/21:10429415 - isvavai.cz</a>
Result on the web
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_31" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_31</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_31" target="_blank" >10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_31</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Meat provocation - can animal ethics actually rest on rational arguments?
Original language description
The aim of this chapter is to investigate in a strategy that is in our view pervasive not only, but particularly in animal ethics. As emotionally charged field of argumentation, the debates seem to be susceptible to provocative strategies. The underlying, potentially provocative, hypothesis is that provocation is an indispensable, yet often tacit vehicle of ethical debates (as inert habits are often called into question), which is concealed by the claim to provide rational arguments. This can be illustrated with moral individualists that build the mainstream in animal ethics, represented e.g. by Peter Singer, whose theory has been debated controversially, but also by Tom Regan or Jeff McMahan. We are not going to tackle the question how one should evaluate this issue, however, we seek to understand why they are often seen as 'agents provocateurs' and how they try to trigger reactions on the part of his readers, opponents or supporters. But also relationalists such as Cora Diamond or Alice Crary use provocative statements as vehicle of explanation, e.g. when complaining about the self-proclaimed 'moral radicals' among the individualists (Crary) and their 'nagging moralistic tone' (Diamond). Through our analysis, we aim to point out the function of provocation and of stirring emotions drawing from resources in philosophical analyses of rhetoric and argumentation theory from Aristotle to current debates. In conclusion, we raise the question if there should be an ethics of ethical debates that is sensitive for the benefits and the offensiveness of provocation.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
D - Article in proceedings
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2021
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Article name in the collection
Justice and food security in a changing climate
ISBN
978-90-8686-362-4
ISSN
—
e-ISSN
—
Number of pages
6
Pages from-to
212-217
Publisher name
Wageningen Academic Publishers
Place of publication
Wageningen
Event location
Fribourg/Switzerland
Event date
Jun 24, 2021
Type of event by nationality
EUR - Evropská akce
UT code for WoS article
—