Katz (2022) provides arguments drawn from the environmental philosophy literature to criticize the conceptualisation and practice of de-extinction with a focus on the ontological and epistemological issues - the human dimension of de-extinction, using concepts relevant only to us and our understanding of the world. In this commentary we wish to draw attention to how this can erase the animals as subjects, instead taking them as objects that are instantiations of other values – naturalness, authenticity, wildness, human artifice, domination. We need also to include the perspective and interests of the animals themselves as additional sources of value for consideration
In Zoopolis, Donaldson and Kymlicka dismiss the abolitionist, or extinctionist approach in animal ri...
Treves, Santiago-Avila, and Lynn (2019) argue for adopting a non-anthropocentric worldview to preven...
The aim of this investigation is to answer the question of why it is prima facie morally wrong to ca...
This analysis maps the key challenges posed by de-extinction to nature conservation law. The aim is ...
The concept of wildlife embodies two sources of controversy regarding de-extinct animals. First, the...
This is an essay about de-extinction and what we should and should not do in order to remedy this
This visual essay explores confronting the question of banal everyday exploitation of non-human anim...
This Perspective is part of the Public Engagement in Science series. --- The use of new technologies...
Treves et al. are right about the need for morally just preservation of nonhumans. Their suggestions...
Several recent studies have critically analyzed discourses involved in the oppression and exploitati...
Beneath important ethical questions about the impacts of de-extinct species on ecosystems and the po...
I detect at least two unspoken assumptions in Birch’s project, and I question, indeed, reject both o...
Several recent studies have critically analyzed discourses involved in the oppression and exploitati...
The “question of the animal,” as it has become known, is central—both strategically and in-itself—to...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that humans’ views of their own superiority are a source of their callousn...
In Zoopolis, Donaldson and Kymlicka dismiss the abolitionist, or extinctionist approach in animal ri...
Treves, Santiago-Avila, and Lynn (2019) argue for adopting a non-anthropocentric worldview to preven...
The aim of this investigation is to answer the question of why it is prima facie morally wrong to ca...
This analysis maps the key challenges posed by de-extinction to nature conservation law. The aim is ...
The concept of wildlife embodies two sources of controversy regarding de-extinct animals. First, the...
This is an essay about de-extinction and what we should and should not do in order to remedy this
This visual essay explores confronting the question of banal everyday exploitation of non-human anim...
This Perspective is part of the Public Engagement in Science series. --- The use of new technologies...
Treves et al. are right about the need for morally just preservation of nonhumans. Their suggestions...
Several recent studies have critically analyzed discourses involved in the oppression and exploitati...
Beneath important ethical questions about the impacts of de-extinct species on ecosystems and the po...
I detect at least two unspoken assumptions in Birch’s project, and I question, indeed, reject both o...
Several recent studies have critically analyzed discourses involved in the oppression and exploitati...
The “question of the animal,” as it has become known, is central—both strategically and in-itself—to...
Chapman & Huffman suggest that humans’ views of their own superiority are a source of their callousn...
In Zoopolis, Donaldson and Kymlicka dismiss the abolitionist, or extinctionist approach in animal ri...
Treves, Santiago-Avila, and Lynn (2019) argue for adopting a non-anthropocentric worldview to preven...
The aim of this investigation is to answer the question of why it is prima facie morally wrong to ca...