“动物权利”之理论述评

发布时间：2018-02-03 13:44

本文关键词： 动物权利人类中心主义非人类中心主义　出处：《南京师范大学》2008年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 人和动物的关系是一个古老的话题,历史上许多理论家都对此进行过论述。尽管论证的角度不同,人们却得出一个统一的结论:与人类相比,动物是低等生物,人类对动物不负有直接的道德义务。自近现代始,边沁、辛格等思想家才开始从功利主义的角度主张人类对动物的直接义务,但是动物与人类的道德地位依然是不平等的。然而,勃兴于20世纪中后期的动物权利理论以一种颠覆性的姿态出现,主张动物拥有与人类平等的道德权利。实际上,动物权利理论是在试图塑造一种非人类中心主义的伦理理念。这是一种近年来兴起的关于人与动物以及人与自然关系的新型伦理理念。非人类中心主义认为,现代社会人类对自然的过度掠夺以及对动物的过度利用,都来源于传统的人类中心主义(人类自认为是自然的主人,是唯一具有天赋价值的道德主体)。若想解决这些问题,必须要将人类道德主体的身份拓展至动物、植物、一切有生命的物种,甚至是一切无生命的自然物。动物权利理论用这样一种方式打开了一个看待人与动物乃至人与自然关系的全新视界。这个全新的视界为我们反观人类中心主义自身,反思人类的地位,警醒人类的狭隘与自私打开了一扇窗。然而,环境伦理学所涉层面主要为道德,并不能根据环境伦理中关于动物权利主体的主张,就认同在法律中确定动物的法律主体地位。更为重要的是,动物不具备自我主体意志,更不具备社会经济、政治交往活动这一权利现象发生的本体。尽管人也是一种动物,但其具备了意志性和社会性,因而理所应当地成为了权利的主体。另外,无论是主张动物权利,还是摈弃动物权利,其共同的目的都是为了保护动物,进而维护人类的根本利益。对动物的保护表达了人类公共道德的精神诉求,也反映了人与自然和谐共存的客观需要。
[Abstract]:The relationship between human beings and animals is an ancient topic, which has been discussed by many theorists in history. Although the argument is from different angles, people have come to a unified conclusion: compared with human beings, animals are inferior creatures. Human beings have no direct moral obligation to animals. Since modern times, Bentham, Singh and other thinkers began to advocate the direct obligations of human beings to animals from the perspective of utilitarianism. But the moral status of animals and human beings is still not equal. However, the theory of animal rights, which flourished in the middle and late period of 20th century, appeared in a subversive manner, claiming that animals have equal moral rights with human beings. Actually... The theory of animal rights is trying to shape an ethical concept of non-anthropocentrism, which is a new ethical concept about the relationship between human beings and animals and between man and nature. The over-plundering of nature and the over-utilization of animals in modern society all come from the traditional anthropocentrism (man thinks himself to be the owner of nature). It is the only moral subject with natural value. To solve these problems, it is necessary to expand the identity of human moral subject to animals, plants, all living species. Even all inanimate natural things. The theory of animal rights opens up a new vision of the relationship between man and animals and even between man and nature in such a way. This new horizon provides us with a new view of anthropocentrism. Body. Reflecting on the status of human beings, warning of human narrowness and selfishness opened a window. However, the aspect of environmental ethics is mainly moral, which can not identify the legal subject status of animals in the law according to the claim of animal rights subject in environmental ethics. More importantly, it is more important to determine the legal subject status of animals in the law. Animals do not have the will of their own subject, not to mention the existence of the right phenomenon of social, economic and political intercourse. Although man is also an animal, it has the will and sociality. So it became the subject of right. In addition, the common purpose of animal rights is to protect animals, whether they advocate animal rights or reject animal rights. The protection of animals not only expresses the spiritual appeal of human public morality, but also reflects the objective need of harmonious coexistence between man and nature.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：D922.6

【引证文献】