000 03924naaaa2200505uu 4500
001 https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/31100
020 _abay
020 _a9781909188839;9781909188853;9781909188860;9781909188877;9781909188846
024 7 _a10.5334/bay
_cdoi
041 0 _aEnglish
042 _adc
072 7 _aHPQ
_2bicssc
072 7 _aJFFZ
_2bicssc
072 7 _aLNKG
_2bicssc
072 7 _aMBDC
_2bicssc
072 7 _aMBNH3
_2bicssc
072 7 _aTVH
_2bicssc
100 1 _aDeckers, Jan
_4auth
245 1 0 _aAnimal (De)liberation : Should the Consumption of Animal Products be Banned?
260 _bUbiquity Press
_c2016
300 _a1 electronic resource (244 p.)
506 0 _aOpen Access
_2star
_fUnrestricted online access
520 _a"In this book, Jan Deckers addresses the most crucial question that people must deliberate in relation to how we should treat other animals: whether we should eat animal products. Many people object to the consumption of animal products from the conviction that it inflicts pain, suffering, and death upon animals. This book argues that a convincing ethical theory cannot be based on these important concerns: rather, it must focus on our interest in human health. Tending to this interest demands not only that we extend speciesism—the attribution of special significance to members of our own species merely because they belong to the same species as ourself—towards nonhuman animals, but also that we safeguard the integrity of nature. In this light, projects that aim to engineer the genetic material of animals to reduce their capacities to feel pain and to suffer are morally suspect. The same applies to projects that aim to develop in-vitro flesh, even if the production of such flesh should be welcomed on other grounds. The theory proposed in this book is accompanied by a political goal, the ‘vegan project’, which strives for a qualified ban on the consumption of animal products. Deckers also provides empirical evidence that some support for this goal exists already, and his analysis of the views of others—including those of slaughterhouse workers—reveals that the vegan project stands firm in spite of public opposition. Many charges have been pressed against vegan diets, including: that they alienate human beings from nature; that they increase human food security concerns; and that they are unsustainable. Deckers argues that these charges are legitimate in some cases, but that, in many situations, vegan diets are actually superior. For those who remain doubtful, the book also contains an appendix that considers whether vegan diets might actually be nutritionally adequate."
540 _aCreative Commons
_fhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
_2cc
_4https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
546 _aEnglish
650 7 _aEthics & moral philosophy
_2bicssc
650 7 _aAnimals & society
_2bicssc
650 7 _aAnimal law
_2bicssc
650 7 _aMedical ethics & professional conduct
_2bicssc
650 7 _aDietetics & nutrition
_2bicssc
650 7 _aAnimal husbandry
_2bicssc
653 _avegan agriculture
653 _aanimals
653 _aspeciesism
653 _aholistic health
653 _agenetic engineering
653 _aveganism
653 _aHuman
653 _aVegetarianism
653 _aWorld of A Song of Ice and Fire
856 4 0 _awww.oapen.org
_uhttps://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/32163/1/613714.pdf
_70
_zDOAB: download the publication
856 4 0 _awww.oapen.org
_uhttps://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/32163/1/613714.pdf
_70
_zDOAB: download the publication
856 4 0 _awww.oapen.org
_uhttps://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/32163/1/613714.pdf
_70
_zDOAB: download the publication
856 4 0 _awww.oapen.org
_uhttps://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/31100
_70
_zDOAB: description of the publication
999 _c54455
_d54455