İnsan haricindeki hayvanlarla ilgili teoriler: mekanizmden abolisyonist düşünceye

Öz

Binlerce yıl önce insanlarla yaşamaya başlamış olan evcil hayvanlar, 18. yüzyılın sonuna kadar insan hizmeti için yaratılmış ve duygulardan yoksun olan “nesneler” olarak kabul edildi. Bu, “hayvanlar makinedir ” görüşü, İngiliz yazar, filozof ve sosyal reformcu olan Jeremy Bentham 'ın 1789' da yazdığı şu cümlelerle değişmeye başladı: “Asıl soru, Onlar fikir yürütebilirler mi veya konuşabilirler mi değil, acı çekebilirler mi? Yasalar neden herhangi bir hassas varlığı korumayı reddetmeli?”. Bentham bu yazısına şöyle devam etmiştir: “İnsanlığın derisinin nefes alan her şeyi kaplayacağı zaman gelecektir”. Günümüzde, insan olmayan hayvanları da korumayI amaçlayan yasal mevzuatın oluşturulması ve insan dışı hayvanlara kötü muamele ile suistimali cezalandırmak için genel bir eğilim olmasına ragmen; hala daha hayvanlarıncanlı ve duyguları olan varlıklar olarak algılanmaları için iyileştirmelerin yapılması gerekliliği de bir gerçektir. Bu derleme makalesi, mekanistik (mekanizm), faydacılık (utilitarizm), refahçı yönelim ve abolisyonist (köleliğin kaldırılması) akım içeren ve hayvan haklarının savunulmasına dayanan farklı felsefeleri ve teorileri tanımlamakta ve tartışmaktadır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Etik
• Hayvan hakları
• Hayvan refahı
• İnsan ve hayvan ilişkileri

Non-human animal theories: from mechanism to abolitionism

Abstract

Domestic animals, which started to live with human-animals thousands of years ago, were regarded as “things” which were created for human service and deprived of emotions until the end of the 18th century. This idea of “animals are machines” began to change in 1789, when the British writer, philosopher and social reformer Jeremy Bentham wrote that “The question is not, «Can they reason?» nor «Can they talk?» but, «Can they suffer?» Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?”. Bentham added that “The time will come when humanity will extend its mantle over everything which breathes.". Today, despite a general tendency for adopting legislation aiming to protect non-human animals and to criminalize animal mistreatment and abuse, the reality is that there are still improvements needed to be done in order to consider animals as sentient beings. This reviewing paper identifies and discusses the different philosophies and theories that are in the basis of the animal rights, which include mechanistic, utilitarianism, welfarism and abolitionism.

Keywords

• Animal Welfare
• Animal rights
• Ethics
• Human and non-human relationships
• Protection

Kaynakça

1. Francione GL, Garner R (2010): The Animal Rights Debate. Columbia University Press; 2010.
2. Cardoso SD, Faraco CB, De Sousa L, Da Graça Pereira G (2017): History and evolution of the European legislation on welfare and protection of companion animals. J Vet Behav, 19, 64-68.
3. Gruen L (2017): The Moral Status of Animals. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
4. Felipe S (2009): Antropocentrismo, sencientismo e biocentrismo: perspectivas éticas abolicionistas, bem-estaristas e conservadoras e o estatuto de animais não-humanos Sônia. Revista Páginas de Filosofia, 1(1), 2.
5. Cochrane A (2012): Animal Rights Without Liberation: Applied Ethics and Human Obligations. Columbia University Press, 4-5.
6. Safina C (2015): Beyond Words: What Animals Think and Feel. 1st ed., a John Macrae Book. Henry Holt and Company. New York, 3-5.
7. Francione G (2000): Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? Temple University Press, xxix.
8. Low P (2012): The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, Ed. Jaak Panksepp, Diana Reiss, David Edelman, Bruno Van Swinderen and Christof Koch, in Francis Crick Memorial Conference on Consciousness in Human and non-Human Animals, Churchill College, University of Cambridge. Available online: http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2019).

9. Francione G (2008): Animals as Persons: Essays on the Abolition of Animal Exploitation. Columbia University Press, 16-17, 25-26, 172-184.
10. Regan T. The case for Animal Rights. 2nd ed. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California; pp. 178, 182-184; 2004.
11. Regan T (2004): Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2, 27-28.
12. Singer P (1980): Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 9(4),325-337.
13. Descartes R (1637): Discours de la méthode, Ed. GF Flammarion, Paris, 69-97.
14. Rocha EM (2004). Animais, homens e sensações segundo Descartes. Kriterion: Journal of Philosophy; 45(110), 350-364.
15. Stoothoff R, Murdoch D (1985): The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
16. Descartes R (1662): Traite De L'Homme, Ed. GF Flammarion, Paris, 125, 161, 184, 195, 216, 220, 226, 228, 312, 325.
17. Cottingham JA (1978): Brute to the Brutes?: Descartes' Treatment of Animals. Philosophy, 53(206), 551-559.
18. Rousseau JJ (1754): Discourse On Inequality & The Social Contract. Ed. Musaicum Books, 2; 2016.
19. Voltaire (1764): Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 22-24; 2018.
20. Hume D (1739): A Treatise of Human Nature. Reprinted from the Original Edition in three volumes and edited, with an analytical index, by L.A. Selby-Bigge, M.A. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1896).
21. Wise S (2016): Animal rights. Encyclopædia Britannica. Available online: https://www.britannica.com/topic/animal-rights (accessed on 25 September 2019).
22. Bentham J (1789): The Principles of Morals and Legislation. Prometheus Books (February 1, 1988), pp. 40.
23. Ryder R (2004): Speciesism revisited. Think, 2(6), 83-92.
24. Singer P (1975): Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. 2nd. Ed. 2009, New York Review of the Books, 237-239.
25. Broom D (1991): Animal welfare: concepts and measurement. J Anim Sci, (69), 4167-4175; 1991.
26. Fraser A, Broom D (1990): Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare. Saunders, New York, 1, 263, 400; 1990.
27. Sztybel D (2010): Animal welfare and animal rights, a comparison. In Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare; 1, 2nd edition, ed. M. Bekoff, Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, 49-51.
28. Regan T (2006): The Case for Animal Rights. AnimalConcerns.org, 169, 273, 316, 389.
29. Scruton R (2000): Animal Rights and Wrongs. Claridge Press, 3rd Revised edition (1 Jan. 2000), 22-31.
30. Frey R (1980): Interests and Rights: The Case Against Animals. Oxford University Press, 5, 76, 142.
31. Tuohey J (1992): Fifteen years after “Animal Liberation”: Has the animal rights movement achieved philosophical legitimacy? Journal of Medical Humanities; 13(2), 79-89.
32. Curtin P (1969): The Atlantic Slave Trade. [S.l.]: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1-58.
33. Felipe S (1996): O anarquismo ético de Robert Nozick (Uma critica ao utilitarismo especiezista que predomina na relação dos homens com os animais). Revista de Ciências Humanas. Florianópolis, 14(20), 51-62.
34. Oliveira G (2004): A teoria dos direitos animais humanos e não-humanos, de Tom Regan. Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy. Florianópolis, 3(3), 283-299.
35. Regan T (2000): The case for animal rights in Sterba, James Earth ethics. Introductory readings on animal rights and environmental ethics. New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 72.