Abstract

By stipulation, the human superiority thesis consists of two claims: (a) the interests of humans should be given preferential consideration relative to the like interests of nonhuman animals, and (b) the lives of humans are more valuable than the lives of nonhuman animals. In his recent book, Mark Bernstein argues that both claims are false. I present and assess Bernstein's main arguments, pointing out where they succeed and where they fall short. I then suggest ways of shoring up and strengthening these arguments. So augmented, Bernstein's arguments provide a compelling case for rejecting both human superiority thesis claims.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
2160-1267
Print ISSN
2156-5414
Pages
pp. 204-213
Launched on MUSE
2017-10-07
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.