상세 보기
코헨의 종차별 옹호논증은 옳은가? - 도덕적 차이 논증과 종류 논증을 중심으로
초록
The purpose of this thesis is to criticize that Cohen's moral difference argument and kind argument can’t be a right answer to anti-speciesist’s criticism (A1) and (A2). Anti-speciesists criticize that speciesism, like racism or sexism, is unfair(A1) and that if animals cannot have their rights, marginal humans can’t, either(A2). Regarding (A1), Cohen presents his moral difference argument that discrimination of animals is fair since there is difference in moral capacity between humans and animals. Regarding (A2), he presents his kind argument that marginal humans own their rights since they belong to human kind. However, I criticize that moral difference argument is a standard unrelated to pain, and that kind argument presents inconsistent conditions and (4) is not inevitably true but a morally unfair principle. Accordingly, I insist that moral difference argument and kind argument can’t be valid answer to (A1) and (A2).
키워드
- 제목
- 코헨의 종차별 옹호논증은 옳은가? - 도덕적 차이 논증과 종류 논증을 중심으로
- 제목 (타언어)
- Is Cohen’s supportive argument for speciesism right? - centering on moral difference argument and kind argument
- 저자
- 이채리
- 발행일
- 2015-06
- 저널명
- 범한철학
- 권
- 77
- 호
- 2
- 페이지
- 305 ~ 330