Animal welfare versus animal abolitionism: a comparison of the theories by Peter Singer and Tom Regan and their influence on the Brazilian Federal Constitution

Autores

  • Amanda Formisano Paccagnella UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista " Julio de Mesquita Filho" Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais
  • Patricia Borba Marchetto UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho"

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18759/rdgf.v20i2.1493

Palavras-chave:

Animal welfare. Animal rights. Animal use abolitionism. Peter Singer. Tom Regan. Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988.

Resumo

With the emergence of environmental concerns and the awakening regarding animal treatment issues, the anthropocentric paradigm has begun to shift, causing many countries to review their position on the legal status of animals. Within the movement for animals, there are two mainly followed philosophical theories: the animal welfare perspective, which has Peter Singer as its leading author, and the animal rights theory, likewise known as the abolitionist movement, with Tom Regan as its central theorist. Utilizing the method of comparative analysis, this article seeks to analyze each author’s thought process and compare theories, contrasting each viewpoint’s moral and philosophical foundations and which principle each author has determined as most fundamental. The main differences between them will also be compared, as well as their conclusions and effects on society, with a particular focus on their influences on the Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988.

 

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Amanda Formisano Paccagnella, UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista " Julio de Mesquita Filho" Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais

Mestranda em Direito pela Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais - UNESP

Patricia Borba Marchetto, UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho"

Doutora em Direito pela Universidad de Barcelona (2001), com título reconhecido pela Faculdade de Direito da USP. Professora na graduação e pós graduação da Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)

Referências

ANTUNES, Paulo de Bessa. Direito Ambiental. 16th edition. Sao Paulo: Atlas, 2014.

BENJAMIN, Antônio Herman. Constitucionalização do ambiente e ecologização da constituição brasileira. In: CANOTILHO, J.J. Gomes; LEITE, José Rubens Morato (org.). Direito constitucional ambiental brasileiro. Sao Paulo: Saraiva, 2008.

BENTHAM, JEREMY. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New Edition, Oxford, 1780/1907.

JOY, MELANIE. Por que amamos cachorros, comemos porcos e vestimos vacas. Cultrix, 1st edition, Sao Paulo, 2014.

KANT, IMMANUEL. The groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1785/2012.

REGAN, TOM. Animal rights, human wrongs. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Maryland, 2003.

REGAN, TOM. Empty cages. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Maryland, 2004a.

REGAN, TOM: The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press, Los Angeles, 2004b.

SINGER, PETER. Animal liberation: the definitive classic of the animal movement. HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 1975/1975/2002.

SINGER, Peter; reply to REGAN, Tom. The dog in the lifeboat: an exchange. The New York Review of Books. April 25, 1985 issue. Available in:

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1985/04/25/the-dog-in-the-lifeboat-an-exchange/. Accessed: Dec 19, 2019.

STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY, The History of Utilitarianism, available in https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/utilitarianism-history/. Accessed Wed Jul 19, 2017.

TRAJANO, TAGORE: Direito animal e ensino jurídico: formação e autonomia de um saber pós-humanista. Thesis (Doctorate Law Program) – Federal University of Bahia. Salvador, 2014.

Downloads

Publicado

2019-12-20

Como Citar

Paccagnella, A. F., & Marchetto, P. B. (2019). Animal welfare versus animal abolitionism: a comparison of the theories by Peter Singer and Tom Regan and their influence on the Brazilian Federal Constitution. Revista De Direitos E Garantias Fundamentais, 20(2), 251–270. https://doi.org/10.18759/rdgf.v20i2.1493

Edição

Seção

Filosofia e Teoria Geral dos Direitos Fundamentais