Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
any, of these versions of utilitarianism can be justified. I have not asked,
nor answered the question of justification in this topic. In order to answer
this question, one needs to point out what it means for a moral theory to
be justified and what it takes to justify a moral theory, or any particular
version of it. This is highly controversial. Hence, arguing about the justifi-
cation of any of those theories would unavoidably lead into meta-ethical
disputes about justification. There are different, more or less demanding
views on what counts as a justification. Either way a sufficient justification
of the theory is necessary in order for it to give us reasons. Then, there is
the question what the force of those moral reasons should be, in relation
to other, non-moral reasons. Those questions have been left untouched
here, as they fall outside the scope of this topic. However, answering these
questions is necessary before we know how we ought to act.
Next to those very fundamental questions about justifications - the
roots, so to say, of the moral theory - there are questions about the
offshoot of the theory. I am well aware that without roots there is no
offshoot. I have gone some way towards indicating Total Utilitarianism's
and Prior Existence Utilitarianism's offshoot by discussing their prac-
tical implications. For instance, I have indicated what they would imply
for the practice of animal husbandry. However, in order to be action
guiding, it would be necessary to become more concrete. It is one thing
to point out what the ideal would be according to each version of utili-
tarianism, be it, for instance, animal-friendly animal husbandry or vegan
agriculture. It is another thing to point out which concrete actions,
and by whom, it takes to approach the realisation of that ideal. A ques-
tion that has already been put on the agenda in animal ethics in this
regard is whether, for instance, the vegan ideal can best be strived for by
focusing on better welfare for kept animals, or rather by incrementally
abolishing the use of animals for certain purposes, or both. 1 According
to utilitarianism, obviously one should do what maximises welfare for
all concerned in the long run. However, it is disputed what this entails.
In order to become very practical, it is not sufficient to make clear what
the ideal should be, but also to point out how it can best be realised.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search