RT Journal Article
T1 It’s Splitsville: Why Animal Ethics and Environmental Ethics Are Incompatible
T2 Es Splitsville: por qué la ética animal y la ética ambiental son incompatibles
A1 Pacheco Faria, Catia Gisela
A1 Paez, Eze
AB In this article, we claim that animal ethics and environmental ethics are incompatible ethical positions. This is because they have incompatible criteria of moral considerability and they have, at least in some cases, incompatible normative implications regarding the interests of sentient individuals. Moreover, we claim that environmentalist views lead to an insurmountable dilemma between inconsistency and implausibility and fail to properly account for the importance of wild animal suffering. From this it follows not only that (a) we can endorse one of the two views but not both at the same time but also that (b) we have overriding reasons to reject environmentalism and endorse some animal ethics view.
PB SAGE
SN 0002-7642
YR 2019
FD 2019
LK https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/101525
UL https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/101525
LA eng
NO Faria, C., & Paez, E. (2019). It’s Splitsville: Why Animal Ethics and Environmental Ethics Are Incompatible. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(8), 1047-1060. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219830467
DS Docta Complutense
RD 7 jun 2026