Executive summary: This exploratory essay argues that applying Rawls’ veil of ignorance to all conscious beings—including animals—reveals that animal welfare, especially for farmed and wild animals, is by far the most pressing moral issue, and our failure to prioritize it stems from bias and a lack of empathy.
Key points:
The veil of ignorance reveals animal suffering as a dominant moral concern: If one imagined being born as any conscious creature, the overwhelming probability is that they would be an animal—especially a factory-farmed or wild one—rather than a human, making their welfare ethically central.
Even low credence in animal consciousness implies massive ethical weight: Due to the sheer number of animals, even small chances that beings like shrimp or insects are conscious lead to strong moral reasons to care about them.
Current human-centered ethics are driven by self-serving bias: The essay argues that ignoring animal suffering reflects a failure of empathy that would dissolve under impartial reasoning.
Moral excuses for excluding animals collapse under impartiality: Justifications based on species, intelligence, or mental complexity don’t withstand scrutiny from behind the veil of ignorance, where one might be any creature.
The veil of ignorance is a test for ethical seriousness, not a fantasy: Rejecting the veil’s implications because we’re not literally behind it misses the point—it’s a tool for overcoming partiality, much like rejecting racism or slavery.
Call to action: The author challenges readers to extend their empathy and ethical concern to animals, especially those typically neglected like shrimp or insects, suggesting our moral priorities must shift drastically.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: This exploratory essay argues that applying Rawls’ veil of ignorance to all conscious beings—including animals—reveals that animal welfare, especially for farmed and wild animals, is by far the most pressing moral issue, and our failure to prioritize it stems from bias and a lack of empathy.
Key points:
The veil of ignorance reveals animal suffering as a dominant moral concern: If one imagined being born as any conscious creature, the overwhelming probability is that they would be an animal—especially a factory-farmed or wild one—rather than a human, making their welfare ethically central.
Even low credence in animal consciousness implies massive ethical weight: Due to the sheer number of animals, even small chances that beings like shrimp or insects are conscious lead to strong moral reasons to care about them.
Current human-centered ethics are driven by self-serving bias: The essay argues that ignoring animal suffering reflects a failure of empathy that would dissolve under impartial reasoning.
Moral excuses for excluding animals collapse under impartiality: Justifications based on species, intelligence, or mental complexity don’t withstand scrutiny from behind the veil of ignorance, where one might be any creature.
The veil of ignorance is a test for ethical seriousness, not a fantasy: Rejecting the veil’s implications because we’re not literally behind it misses the point—it’s a tool for overcoming partiality, much like rejecting racism or slavery.
Call to action: The author challenges readers to extend their empathy and ethical concern to animals, especially those typically neglected like shrimp or insects, suggesting our moral priorities must shift drastically.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.