SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Sumitra Shah)
Date:
Wed Aug 15 07:47:18 2007
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (10 lines)
http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hrp/lecture/facing_animals-nussbaum.pdf 

I was prompted to send this link to a paper by Martha Nussbaum by Barkley Rosser's interesting post describing the behavior of elephants for which he said he did not have a nice link and John C. Médaille's challenge that "They (humans) can ask of any given trade, "Is this right?" Not merely, mind you, "Is this advantageous?" but "is it right?" Animals do things for the common good that may be disadvantageous to an individual; the nurse spider sacrifices herself for her young, for example. But I doubt she can question the trade or avoid the sacrifice." 

The paper dwells on many of the threads in this discussion. My reason for posting it to the list is not only because it is relevant to the ongoing conversation, but it critically examines utilitarianism and our treatment of animals. And yes, there is much research that shows that elephants have remarkable ability to mourn and care for their dead. The most poignant story I saw was that of a young female elephant refusing to leave the side of her mother who stayed with her other dead offspring in spite of risk to themselves. 

Nussbaum has nice things to say about Bentham and especially Mill. But there are many more positive things that can be said about Mill's variant of utilitarianism. There are scholars on this list who have done a lot of work on this and can shed light on it. . .

Sumitra Shah

ATOM RSS1 RSS2