An Analysis of Capacities, Moral Hierarchies, and the Moral Status of Non-Human Animals in Contemporary Animal Rights Work

The primary objective of this thesis is to demonstrate the pernicious impact that moral hierarchies have on our perception and subsequent treatment of non-human animals. Moral hierarchies in general are characterized by a dynamic in which one group is considered to be fundamentally superior to a lesser group. This thesis focuses specifically on the moral hierarchies that arise when humans are assumed to be superior to non-human animals in virtue of their advanced mental capabilities. The operative hypothesis of this thesis is essentially that moral hierarchies thwart the provision of justice to non-human animals in that they function as a justification for otherwise impermissible actions. When humans are assumed to be fundamentally superior to non-human animals then it becomes morally permissible for humans to kill non-human animals and utilize them as mere instrumentalities. This thesis is driven primarily by an in-depth analysis of the approaches to animal rights that are provided by Peter Singer, Tom Regan, and Gary Francione. Each of these thinkers claim that they overcome anthropocentrism and provide approaches that preclude the establishment of a moral hierarchy. One of the major findings of this thesis, however, is that Singer and Regan offer approaches that remain highly anthropocentric despite the fact that each thinker claims that they have overcome anthropocentrism. The anthropocentrism persists in these respective approaches in that each thinkers gives humans Regan and Singer have different conceptions of the criteria that are required to afford a being moral worth, but they both give preference to beings that have the cognitive ability to form desires regarding the future.. As a result, a moral hierarchy emerges in which humans are regarded to be fundamentally superior. Francione, however, provides an approach that does not foster a moral hierarchy. Francione creates such an approach by applying the principle of equal consideration of interests in a consistent manner. Moreover, Francione argues that mere sentience is both a necessary and sufficient condition for being eligible and subsequently receiving moral consideration. The upshot of this thesis is essentially that the moral treatment of animals is not compatible with the presence of a moral hierarchy. As a result, this thesis demonstrates that future approaches to animal rights must avoid the establishment of moral hierarchies. The research and analysis within this thesis demonstrates that this is not a possibility, however, unless all theories of justice that are to accommodate animals abandon the notion that cognition matters morally.

Considering the Moral Complexity of Adolescents in Divided Societies

This paper focuses on adolescents who live in divided societies and how they navigate those divisions as they develop as civic actors. The study sites are Northern Ireland, South Africa, and the United States. In each setting we collected surveys, conducted focus groups with teachers and students, and followed students through the 9th and 10th grades in a case study classroom. In all locales, the students used materials from Facing History and Ourselves, and their teachers had participated in workshops on using those materials. In this paper we follow a case study student from the United States who provides a particularly complex look at issues of division and ethical civic development. The student, Pete, is a white immigrant from South Africa, studying in a multi-ethnic and multi-racial school in the United States. He confronts his South African legacies in the context of a foreign school system, which is working to help U.S. students confront their own legacies. Across two, one-semester, citizenship classes, Pete shows us the tension between an academic stance and a moral/emotional stance. When moral dilemmas become complex for him, he begins to lose his ability to judge. Teacher support and guidance is critical to help students like Pete learn to hold their moral ground, while understanding why others act as they do.