Transcript Ethics of Whaling

Ethics of
Whaling
In search of the right thing to do
History of Antarctic Whaling
Should Whaling Be
Banned?
 Answer
has several dimensions:
 economic
 cultural
 scientific
 moral
 Our discussion will be limited to moral
arguments
Ethical Inquiry
 “Seeking
the right thing to do.”
 What is the right thing to do?
 action
with best reasons (Socrates)
 among choices available to you
Is Whaling Morally Wrong?
Develop
a list of relevant reasons
to support a moral argument
for/against whaling.
For Whaling
Against Whaling
Example Morally Significant
Characteristics
 Sentience
- ability to suffer
 Intelligence
 Self-aware
 Immortal soul
 Concern for conspecifics
 Playfulness
 Ability to communicate
Form of Moral Argument
Premises
Guiding
Principle
Conclusion
Example Moral Argument
Action x causes pain and suffering to
sentient* beings
sentient = “capable of feeling
pleasure and pain”
There are alternatives to action x
It is wrong to cause pain and suffering,
unless there is a sufficiently good reason
to justify it
Therefore, we should not do action x
Develop Your Own Argument
Premises
Guiding Principle
Conclusion
Evaluating Moral Arguments
 Are
premises true?
 Does conclusion
follow logically?
 Is moral principle
justifiable?
Need for General Moral Principles
 Cultural
–
Relativism
our cultural preferences are NOT based on
rational reasoning
 Consequences
 Social
of Cultural Relativism
practices would be immune from criticism
 Social reform (or moral progress) is meaningless
Moral Theories
 Utilitarianism
–
–
–
Morally right actions maximize aggregate
happiness. Pleasure is only intrinsically
good thing. Pain and suffering are
intrinsically bad things.
Egalitarianism
equal consideration to interests of everyone
affected by our conduct.
Other Moral Theories
The
Rights View -- Beings have certain
moral rights that limit how they may be
treated. Rights are more basic than utility
and independent of the consequences of our
actions.
 e.g. right to life
–
hunter-gatherer societies
Justice (Fairness)
 Treat
beings fairly according to
individual needs and merits
 e.g. - punishment
 any differential treatment must be
justified by relevant reasons
 Is it fair to deny whales to Norwegians
but not deny whales to Inuits?
Other Moral Theories
 Moral
–
equal consideration of interests unless there is a
relevant difference that justifies difference in
treatment
 Divine
–
Individualism
command
Action is right if, and only if, God commands it
Review of Ethics
Lesson
 Ethics
involves deciding “What is the
right thing to do?”
 action
with best reasons (Socrates)
 among choices available to you
 Evaluating
 Are
Moral Arguments
premises true?
 Does conclusion follow logically?
 Is moral principle justifiable?
Review Continued
 Dependence
–
Arctic regions (Iceland & Norway) &
regions where land-based protein production
is limited by climate or geography (Japan)
 Resumption
–
on whaling
of whaling
no longer represents same threat of
extinction of great whales because whale oil
replaced by petroleum and vegetable oils.
Anti-whaling Argument #1
 Killing
whales is sadistic and cruel
behavior
 Cruelty ought to be condemned and
discouraged
 Therefore whaling is wrong.
Argument #1 Evaluation
 Killing
whales is
sadistic and cruel
behavior
 Cruelty ought to be
condemned and
discouraged
 Therefore whaling is
wrong.
Are premises true?
 Does conclusion
follow logically?
 Is moral principle
justifiable?

Anti-whaling Argument #2
 Whaling
involves the infliction of
unnecesary suffering and death on
sentient beings.
 Anything that causes unnecessary
suffering, or unnecessary death, on
sentient beings is wrong.
 Therefore whaling is wrong.
Whaling = Livestock Slaughter?
Speciesism:
discrimination based
solely on species
membership
Pro-whaling Argument #1
 Whaling
is an important
cultural tradition
 All cultural traditions
are permissible
 Therefore, whaling is
permissible
All Cultural Traditions
Permissible?
cock-fighting
hub-cap
stealing
infanticide
The Appropriate Questions
 What
Cultural Differences
are Respectable?
 Are we being consistent in
our moral arguments?
Pro-whaling Argument #2
 Whaling
provides for nutritional and
cultural needs of certain coastal societies.
 Whale killing can be done with minimum
pain and suffering to whales.
 Humane killing of whales would maximize
the interests of all sentient beings affected
by whaling.
 Therefore, whaling is permissible in these
circumstances.
Ethics of Other Wildlife
Decisions
Deer
Management
Wolf Re-introduction
International Wildlife
Management
The Case for Animal Rights
Tom Regan 1983
 Normal
mammals (1 yr+) have basic moral
right not to be harmed on the grounds that
doing so benefits others
 In philosophical jargon:
–
moral rights are “trump cards” against
utilitarian arguments
Animal Rights View Incompatible with
Environmental Ethics?
Captive breeding of individual sentient
beings (e.g. endangered species) is a moral
atrocity
Impermissible to kill exotic, destructive
animals
Hunting would be prohibited, even
therapeutic (required to preserve ecosystem
integrity
Obliged to prevent “natural” predation
Can the Utilitarian Argument
Bridge the Gap?
Utilitarianism: max aggregate “happiness”
How to define happiness? two ways:
Hedonism: happiness is pleasure or absence of
pain and suffering
Preference: satisfaction of conscious aims
Harm of action depends on “futureoriented” desires of a being
A Hedonistic Utilitarian Argument for
Therapeutic Hunting
 We
have a moral obligation to minimize pain.
 More pain would be caused by letting “nature”
take its course than by carefully regulated
therapeutic hunts.
 Therefore, we are morally obligated to conduct
carefully regulated therapeutic hunts.
Disagreements?
Can Animal Rights and
Environmental Ethics Converge?
 Any
workable ethics
must recognize some
hierarchies.
“Whenever I injure life of any
sort, I must be quite clear
whether it is necessary.
Beyond the unavoidable,
I must never go.”
Albert Schweitzer
Overriding Moral Duties
 General
duty to preserve integrity of
ecosystems as the necessary context in
which future generations pursue their most
important interests.
 These interests are of overriding moral
importance, and
 safeguarding future generations’ pursuit of
these interests requires us to remove
exotics, breed endangered species,
reintroduce predators, and ...
Lessons Learned
Desired
goals must be acceptable
Science is one part of management
Regulations must be enforceable
Animal welfare is a desirable goal
(humane killing, if killing is necessary)
Leopold’s Land Ethic
 An
ethic, ecologically, is a limitation on
freedom of action in the struggle for
existence.
 The extension of ethics to land is an
evolutionary possibility and an ecological
necessity.
 All ethics so far evolved rest upon a single
premise: that the individual is a member of
a community of interdependent parts.
The Leopold Imperative
“A thing is right when it tends to preserve
the integrity, stability, and beauty of the
biotic community. It is wrong when it
tends otherwise.”
Homework Assignment
Continue
to develop and debate
moral arguments
Evaluate sources of information
Recognize your ethnocentric biases
Identify oversimplified or
exaggerated arguments
Ethics Quiz
 Your
Name:
 What was the most important thing you
learned today?
 What question is still troubling you about
this topic?