Philosophers and Antivivisectionism

Relevant works of the philosophers listed are: Animal Liberation, Peter Singer (London, 1976)

Practical Ethics, Peter Singer (Cambridge, 1979), Chapters 3–5

All That Therein Dwell, Tom Regan (California, 1982)

The Case for Animal Rights, Tom Regan (London, 1983)

The Moral Status of Animals, Stephen Clark (Oxford, 1977)

The Nature of the Beast, Stephen Clark

Animals and Why They Matter, Mary Midgley (London, 1983)

Interests and Rights: The Case Against Animals, R.G. Frey (Oxford, 1983)

Rights, Killing and Suffering, R.G. Frey (Oxford, 1983)

Ecological Ethics and Politics, H.J. McCloskey (Totowa, NJ, 1983), Chapter 6

Man's Responsibility for Nature, J. Passmore (London, 1974), p. 16

Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, B. Williams (London, 1985), pp. 118–119, 216

See his contribution in Journal of Medical Ethics 9(2), (1983).

See op. cit. and “Rights” by H.J. McCloskey in Philosophical Quarterly 26 (1976).

See his Practical Ethics.

This line of criticism can be found in the cited works of Regan and Frey. In writing this article I have not had time to re-read the works of the philosophers referred to, but I believe the views I ascribe to them are essentially correct and, in any case, I am concerned with them as the sorts of view in the air.

Richard Ryder, author of Victims of Science (London, 1975). has expressed similar views.

See Of Mice, Models and Men, Andrew Rowan (Albany, New York, 1984, pp. 116–120). for an informative discussion.

See “Why Knowledge Matters” by Mary Midgley in Animals in Research (ed Sperlinger D. ), J. Wiley & Sons Ltd. (London, 1981).