Animal Rights: A Sociological Approach

Robert Hall

doi:10.5565/rev/da.353

Abstract

Building on the political perspective of Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, I propose a sociological approach to animal rights, which takes the various types of human-animal relationships that have developed historically as the basis of current human obligations to members of other species.

Highlights

Building on the political perspective of Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, I propose a sociological approach to animal rights, which takes the various types of human-animal relationships that have developed historically as the basis of current human obligations to members of other species
Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka have developed a theory of animal citizenship that they have dubbed "Zoopolis"
Citizens in democratic countries have three basic legal rights: 1) the right to live in a country, 2) the right to have their interests or welfare included in the political arrangements and 3) the right to participate in democratic institutions

Summary

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

The supposition of this article is that both morality and the law are social constructs and that we use ethical perspectives to argue for or justify changes in the law. Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka have developed a theory of animal citizenship that they have dubbed "Zoopolis".1 According to this perspective, citizens in democratic countries have three basic legal rights: 1) the right to live in a country, 2) the right to have their interests or welfare included in the political arrangements and 3) the right to participate in democratic institutions. Moral obligations are social constructs that are based on historically developed social relationships – family first, communities (including possibly religious obligations), professions where people adopt different social roles and responsibilities, nations and global relationships. Each of these relationships is a field of study within sociology.

OBLIGATIONS TO ANIMALS

The anthropologist Ralph Linton developed a simple typology of the social

CONCLUSION