Introduction - Killing Happy Animals: Explorations in Utilitarian Ethics - page 4

none of the critics have offered satisfactory alternative solutions to
the underlying problems to which replaceability offers one, if not
very congenial, answer. 7
One of the versions of utilitarianism that I present in this topic avoids
the Replaceability Argument.
The Total View and the Prior Existence View are two fundamentally
different utilitarian views regarding the question: Across whom should
welfare be aggregated? These different versions of utilitarianism have
different implications as to how personal or impersonal utilitarian moral
theory is. A major strand of criticism that has been brought forward against
utilitarianism is that utilitarianism is not really interested in benefits and
harms for individuals, but in welfare as an abstract quantity. What many
people consider really wrong with utilitarianism is that instead of valuing
happiness because of what it does for sentient beings, it values sentient
beings for what they do for happiness. 8 I will present a comprehensive
version of utilitarianism that is concerned with harms and benefits for
sentient beings, rather than with welfare as an abstract quantity. Thus, by
exploring the utilitarian stance on animal husbandry, I will also address
two related fundamental issues within the moral theory: the question of
across whom to aggregate and the criticism of being impersonal.
Furthermore, my exploration of the utilitarian stance on animal
husbandry will lead to fundamental philosophical discussions beyond
animal husbandry and beyond utilitarianism. Topics to be discussed
in this topic are the moral status of possible beings and the question
whether causing a being to exist can harm or benefit that being. A
further topic is the question of what to do if our choices determine who
will exist or how many will exist. It will be explored what the harm of
death consists in for humans and animals. Furthermore, the relevance
of some competing notions of betterness will be investigated. Thus,
discussing the ethics of killing and creating animals will lead us to topics
that might seem arcane and far removed from the practical questions
we are setting out to answer. What Singer points out in his introduction
to Practical Ethics is exemplified by this topic as well: 'our judgments of
what is right and wrong need to be informed by investigations into deep
and difficult philosophical issues'. 9
This topic, then, examines the Replaceability Argument. This argu-
ment has been used to justify killing of animals. The focus is on the rele-
vance of this argument for the practice of animal husbandry. It should be
noted, though, that the argument is also relevant for other practices in
which animals are killed and replaced. Relevant practices include: