THE CONCEPT OF INTRINSIC VALUE AND TRANSGENIC ANIMALS

被引:37
作者
VERHOOG, H
机构
[1] Institute of Theoretical Biology, Leiden University, Leiden, 2300 RA
来源
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS | 1992年 / 5卷 / 02期
关键词
GENETIC MANIPULATION; INTRINSIC VALUE; ZOOCENTRIC ETHICS; BIOCENTRIC ETHICS; ANIMAL TELOS;
D O I
10.1007/BF01966357
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
The creation of transgenic animals by means of modern techniques of genetic manipulation is evaluated in the light of different interpretations of the concept of intrinsic value. The zoocentric interpretation, emphasizing the suffering of individual, sentient animals, is described as an extension of the anthropocentric interpretation. In a biocentric or ecocentric approach the concept of intrinsic value first of all denotes independence of humans and a non-instrumental relation to animals. In the zoocentric approach of Bernard Rollin, genetic engineering is seen as a morally neutral tool, as long as the animal does not suffer as a result of it. Robert Colwell who defends an ecocentric ethic, makes a sharp distinction between wild animals and domesticated animals. Genetic manipulation of wild species is a serious moral issue, in contrast to genetic manipulation of domesticated species which is no problem at all for Colwell Both authors do not take the species-specific nature (or "telos") of domesticated animals seriously. When domestication is seen as a process between the two Poles of the wild animal and the human construct (which can be patented), the technique of genetic manipulation can only be seen as a further encroachment upon the intrinsic value of animals. At the level of molecular biology, the concept of an animal's telos loses its meaning.
引用
收藏
页码:147 / 160
页数:14
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] Callicott J.B., In defence of the land ethic, (1989)
  • [2] Colwell R.K., Natural and unnatural history: biological diversity and genetic engineering, Scientists and their responsibilities, (1989)
  • [3] Dresser R., Ethical and legal issues in patenting animal life, Jurimetrics Journal, Summer, pp. 399-435, (1988)
  • [4] Frankena W.K., Ethics, (1963)
  • [5] Frankena W.K., Ethics and the environment, Ethics and the problems of the 21st. century, (1979)
  • [6] Lynch M., Sacrifice and the transformation of the animal body into a scientific object: laboratory culture and ritual practice in the neurosciences, Social Studies of Science, 18, pp. 265-289, (1988)
  • [7] Naess, A defense of the deep ecology movement, Environmental Ethics, 6, 3, pp. 265-270, (1984)
  • [8] Regan T., The case for animal rights, (1984)
  • [9] Rollin B.E., Animal rights and human morality, (1981)
  • [10] Rollin B.E., The Frankenstein thing: the moral impact of genetic engineering of agricultural animals on society and future science, Genetic engineering of animals. An agricultural perspective, pp. 285-297, (1986)