In particular, it seems likely to me that how much you should value animals is not an objective fact of life but a factor that values across people.
I think it is both an objective fact of life, and also a factor that varies across people. Similarly, for valuations of human welfare as a function of e.g. country of birth, there are objective biological differences between humans born in different countries (which I think have a negligible impact on their capacity for welfare), and also different levels of nationalism.
Agree. The factor on which we are weighting animals—their ability to feel—is objective, even if our assessment of it is uncertain (although it’s becoming increasingly certain).
One can disagree that this is the factor that we should be focusing on, but I’m yet to see such an argument which isn’t also speciesist.
Thanks, Nuño.
I think it is both an objective fact of life, and also a factor that varies across people. Similarly, for valuations of human welfare as a function of e.g. country of birth, there are objective biological differences between humans born in different countries (which I think have a negligible impact on their capacity for welfare), and also different levels of nationalism.
Agree. The factor on which we are weighting animals—their ability to feel—is objective, even if our assessment of it is uncertain (although it’s becoming increasingly certain).
One can disagree that this is the factor that we should be focusing on, but I’m yet to see such an argument which isn’t also speciesist.