Help from philosophy: responding to the animal rights challenge

Abstract

The chasm that C. P. Snow noted between the two cultures of science and the humanities may be part of an explanation for the success of the animal rights movement. Many philosophers, who represent the culture of the humanities, take an animal liberation position in the ethical debate about the use of animals in research. One who does not is Peter Carruthers. He presents a valuable critique of two important animal liberation ethicists, Tom Regan and Peter Singer, analyzing their thinking on the origins of ethical ideas and the source of ethical motivation. He identifies problems in their theories leading to conclusions that defy common sense about the value of human life. As an alternative, Carruthers introduces John Rawls' theory of contractualism. This theory provides a framework within which medical researchers and the public at large can defend the humane use of animals in research. His work promises to help bridge the gap between scientists and representatives of the humanities.