Animals' Rights

Last updated
Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress
Animals' rights considered in relation to social progress (1894).jpg
First page of the 1894 first American edition
Author Henry Stephens Salt
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
Subject Animal rights
Publisher George Bell & Sons
Publication date
1892 (first American edition 1894; first edition reprint 1980; second edition, 1915; third edition, 1922)
Media typePrint
Pages166

Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress is an 1892 book by the English social reformer Henry Stephens Salt. [1] It is widely considered to be the first explicit treatment of the concept of animal rights. [2]

Contents

Content

In the book, Salt argues against the idea of speciesism, though the term was not coined for another 76 years.

The book also argues against vivisection, misuse of horses and wild animals, hunting and fishing, and the fur trade, and in favour of vegetarianism. [3]

Reception

James H. Hyslop reviewed the book contemporaneously for the International Journal of Ethics , strongly praising the book's intentions "its spirit shows the finest feelings a moral being can possess" but also arguing that it failed to present a theoretical justification for the equal rights it presumes between humans and animals: "No fundamental position, philosophical or theological, is taken as ground for such rights, and hence we have only an exposure of certain logical weaknesses in the defence of existing practices towards animal life." [3]

Hyslop also argues that Salt conflates disparate ethical questions:

the book confuses three distinct problems which ought to be kept distinct from one another. (1) The abstract question of animal rights of any kind; (2) The question of their treatment as sensible beings, whether we accord them the same rights as man or not; and (3) The question of vegetarianism. The last question virtually assumes that they have equal rights with man. On the other hand, some can defend animal rights of a certain kind without including a prohibition of animal food. Then, independently of all questions of rights, others may insist on human conduct towards animals upon the grounds of man's duty to moral law in general. [3]

In 1895, The William and Mary Quarterly said of the work: "Mr. Salt is undoubtedly ahead of his age by many years." [4]

Editions

The first American edition published in 1894, included an essay "On Vivisection in America" by Albert Leffingwell. [1]

A reprint of the first edition of the book was published in 1980, with a preface by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer, who is well known for his work on the ethics of treatment towards animals (specifically in the book Animal Liberation ). The 1980 reissue prompted a review from Stephen Clark who praised Salt's book with some provisos. He states that Salt's attempt to blame the treatment of non-human animals on the theological doctrine of man having "dominion" over the natural world was mistaken. [5]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Speciesism</span> Special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership

Speciesism is a term used in philosophy regarding the treatment of individuals of different species. The term has several different definitions within the relevant literature. Some sources specifically define speciesism as discrimination or unjustified treatment based on an individual's species membership, while other sources define it as differential treatment without regard to whether the treatment is justified or not. Richard Ryder, who coined the term, defined it as "a prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species." Speciesism results in the belief that humans have the right to use non-human animals, which scholars say is pervasive in the modern society. Studies from 2015 and 2019 suggest that people who support animal exploitation also tend to endorse racist, sexist, and other prejudicial views, which furthers the beliefs in human supremacy and group dominance to justify systems of inequality and oppression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David George Ritchie</span>

David George Ritchie was a Scottish philosopher who had a distinguished university career at Edinburgh, and Balliol College, Oxford, and after being fellow of Jesus College and a tutor at Balliol College was elected professor of logic and metaphysics at St Andrews. He was also the third president of the Aristotelian Society in 1898.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Henry Stephens Salt</span> English writer and social reformer (1851–1939)

Henry Shakespear Stephens Salt was an English writer and campaigner for social reform in the fields of prisons, schools, economic institutions, and the treatment of animals. He was a noted ethical vegetarian, anti-vivisectionist, socialist, and pacifist, and was well known as a literary critic, biographer, classical scholar and naturalist. It was Salt who first introduced Mohandas Gandhi to the influential works of Henry David Thoreau, and influenced Gandhi's study of vegetarianism. Salt is considered, by some, to be the "father of animal rights," having been one of the first writers to argue explicitly in favour of animal rights, rather than just improvements to animal welfare, in his Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress (1892).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stephen R. L. Clark</span> British philosopher

Stephen Richard Lyster Clark is an English philosopher and professor emeritus of philosophy at the University of Liverpool. Clark specialises in the philosophy of religion and animal rights, writing from a philosophical position that might broadly be described as Christian Platonist. He is the author of twenty books, including The Moral Status of Animals (1977), The Nature of the Beast (1982), Animals and Their Moral Standing (1997), G.K. Chesterton (2006), Philosophical Futures (2011), and Ancient Mediterranean Philosophy (2012), as well as 77 scholarly articles, and chapters in another 109 books. He is a former editor-in-chief of the Journal of Applied Philosophy (1990–2001).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Oswald (activist)</span> Scottish philosopher, writer, poet, social critic, vegetarian and revolutionary

John Oswald was a Scottish philosopher, writer, poet, social critic, vegetarian and revolutionary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal rights</span> Belief that animals have interests that should be considered

Animal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth independent of their utility to humans, and that their most basic interests—such as avoiding suffering—should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. Broadly speaking, and particularly in popular discourse, the term "animal rights" is often used synonymously with "animal protection" or "animal liberation". More narrowly, "animal rights" refers to the idea that many animals have fundamental rights to be treated with respect as individuals—rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture that may not be overridden by considerations of aggregate welfare.

Animal ethics is a branch of ethics which examines human-animal relationships, the moral consideration of animals and how nonhuman animals ought to be treated. The subject matter includes animal rights, animal welfare, animal law, speciesism, animal cognition, wildlife conservation, wild animal suffering, the moral status of nonhuman animals, the concept of nonhuman personhood, human exceptionalism, the history of animal use, and theories of justice. Several different theoretical approaches have been proposed to examine this field, in accordance with the different theories currently defended in moral and political philosophy. There is no theory which is completely accepted due to the differing understandings of what is meant by the term ethics; however, there are theories that are more widely accepted by society such as animal rights and utilitarianism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Humanitarian League</span> British advocacy group

The Humanitarian League was a British radical advocacy group formed by Henry S. Salt and others to promote the principle that it is wrong to inflict avoidable suffering on any sentient being. It was based in London and operated between 1891 and 1919.

The concept of moral rights for animals is believed to date as far back as Ancient India, particularly early Jainist and Hindu history. What follows is mainly the history of animal rights in the Western world. There is a rich history of animal protection in the ancient texts, lives, and stories of Eastern, African, and Indigenous peoples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Lawrence (writer)</span>

John Lawrence was an English writer on political and agricultural subjects and an early advocate of animal welfare and rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">J. Howard Moore</span> American zoologist and philosopher

John Howard Moore was an American zoologist, philosopher, educator, humanitarian and socialist. He is considered to be an early, yet neglected, proponent of animal rights and ethical vegetarianism, and was a leading figure in the American humanitarian movement. Moore was a prolific writer, authoring numerous articles, books, essays, pamphlets on topics including animal rights, education, ethics, evolutionary biology, humanitarianism, socialism, temperance, utilitarianism and vegetarianism. He also lectured on many of these subjects and was widely regarded as a talented orator, earning the name the "silver tongue of Kansas" for his lectures on prohibition.

<i>The Universal Kinship</i> 1906 book by J. Howard Moore

The Universal Kinship is a 1906 book by American zoologist, philosopher, educator and socialist J. Howard Moore. In the book, Moore advocated for a secular sentiocentric philosophy, called the Universal Kinship, which mandated the ethical consideration and treatment of all sentient beings based on Darwinian principles of shared evolutionary kinship, and a universal application of the Golden Rule; a direct challenge to anthropocentric hierarchies and ethics. The book was endorsed by Henry S. Salt, Mark Twain and Jack London, Eugene V. Debs and Mona Caird. Moore expanded on his ideas in The New Ethics, published in 1907.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles R. Magel</span> American philosopher and animal rights activist

Charles Russell Magel was an American philosopher, animal rights activist and bibliographer. He was professor emeritus of Philosophy and Ethics at Moorhead State University.

Humphrey Primatt was an English clergyman and animal rights writer. Primatt has been described as "one of the most important figures in the development of a notion of animal rights."

Moral Inquiries on the Situation of Man and of Brutes is an 1824 book by Lewis Gompertz, an early animal rights advocate and vegan. In the book, Gompertz lays out a moral framework for the treatment of and obligations towards humans and other animals, arguing against the consumption of meat, milk, eggs, silk and leather, denouncing vivisection and arguing for aiding animals suffering in the wild.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arthur Schopenhauer's view on animal rights</span> Philosophical thought

Arthur Schopenhauer was a 19th-century German philosopher. He was an early defender of animal rights, going against the prevailing idea at the time that animals had no rights and only had instrumental value to humans. According to Schopenhauer, "The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality." Schopenhauer argued that animals should be treated with respect and compassion, as they, like humans, are subjected to the metaphysical will, and experience suffering and craving as a result.

<i>The Ethics of Diet</i> 19th-century book

The Ethics of Diet: A Catena of Authorities Deprecatory of the Practice of Flesh-eating is an 1883 book by Howard Williams, on the history of vegetarianism. The book was influential on the development of the Victorian vegetarian movement.

The replaceability argument, or the logic of the larder, is a philosophical argument that has been used to reject vegetarianism. It holds that consuming nonhuman animal products is good for animals because if they were not consumed, fewer animals would be brought into existence. The argument has particularly been engaged with within the context of utilitarianism.

<i>Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology</i> 1897 book by Edward Payson Evans

Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology is an 1897 book by the American scholar and early animal rights advocate Edward Payson Evans, which argues for the use of animal psychology as the basis for animal rights in the historical evolution of ethics.

References

  1. 1 2 "Animals' Rights, Considered in Relation to Social Progress". Henry S. Salt Society. Retrieved 2019-10-05.
  2. Taylor, Angus. Animals and Ethics. Broadview Press, 2003, p. 61.
  3. 1 2 3 Hyslop, James H. (July 1895). "Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress by Henry S. Salt". International Journal of Ethics. 5 (4): 532–533. doi:10.1086/205375. JSTOR   2375563.
  4. "Animals' Rights, Considered in Relation to Social Progress, etc by Henry S. Salt". The William and Mary Quarterly. 3 (3). January 1895. JSTOR   1914789.
  5. Stephen Clark (January 1983). "Animals' Rights, Considered in Relation to Social Progress by Henry S. Salt". The Philosophical Quarterly. 33 (130): 98–100. doi:10.2307/2219213. hdl: 2027/coo1.ark:/13960/t9m33db2f . JSTOR   2219213.