Two perspectives on animal morality

Adam Willows, Marcus Baynes-Rock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Are animals moral agents? In this article, a theologian and an anthropologist unite to bring the resources of each field to bear on this question. Alas, not all interdisciplinary conversations end harmoniously, and after much discussion the two authors find themselves in substantial disagreement over the answer. The article is therefore presented in two halves, one for each side of the argument. As well as presenting two different positions, our hope is that this article clarifies the different understandings of morality in our respective fields and will help to offset confusion in interdisciplinary dialogue. In what follows, we each present our case. In the first section, Adam Willows argues that moral activity necessarily involves the use of reason, symbolic thought, and language and is on that basis an exclusively human affair. In the second, Marcus Baynes-Rock discusses his experience of relationality with other creatures; a relationality which, he argues, creates a shared understanding of obligations which are characteristically moral.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)953-970
JournalZygon: Journal of Religion and Science
Volume53
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2018

Cite this

Willows, A., & Baynes-Rock, M. (2018). Two perspectives on animal morality. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, 53(4), 953-970. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464
Willows, Adam ; Baynes-Rock, Marcus. / Two perspectives on animal morality. In: Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. 2018 ; Vol. 53, No. 4. pp. 953-970.
@article{c88c87a9be6242df8c9acb91f711283d,
title = "Two perspectives on animal morality",
abstract = "Are animals moral agents? In this article, a theologian and an anthropologist unite to bring the resources of each field to bear on this question. Alas, not all interdisciplinary conversations end harmoniously, and after much discussion the two authors find themselves in substantial disagreement over the answer. The article is therefore presented in two halves, one for each side of the argument. As well as presenting two different positions, our hope is that this article clarifies the different understandings of morality in our respective fields and will help to offset confusion in interdisciplinary dialogue. In what follows, we each present our case. In the first section, Adam Willows argues that moral activity necessarily involves the use of reason, symbolic thought, and language and is on that basis an exclusively human affair. In the second, Marcus Baynes-Rock discusses his experience of relationality with other creatures; a relationality which, he argues, creates a shared understanding of obligations which are characteristically moral.",
author = "Adam Willows and Marcus Baynes-Rock",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
doi = "doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464",
language = "English",
volume = "53",
pages = "953--970",
number = "4",

}

Willows, A & Baynes-Rock, M 2018, 'Two perspectives on animal morality', Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 953-970. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464

Two perspectives on animal morality. / Willows, Adam; Baynes-Rock, Marcus.

In: Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, Vol. 53, No. 4, 12.2018, p. 953-970.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Two perspectives on animal morality

AU - Willows, Adam

AU - Baynes-Rock, Marcus

PY - 2018/12

Y1 - 2018/12

N2 - Are animals moral agents? In this article, a theologian and an anthropologist unite to bring the resources of each field to bear on this question. Alas, not all interdisciplinary conversations end harmoniously, and after much discussion the two authors find themselves in substantial disagreement over the answer. The article is therefore presented in two halves, one for each side of the argument. As well as presenting two different positions, our hope is that this article clarifies the different understandings of morality in our respective fields and will help to offset confusion in interdisciplinary dialogue. In what follows, we each present our case. In the first section, Adam Willows argues that moral activity necessarily involves the use of reason, symbolic thought, and language and is on that basis an exclusively human affair. In the second, Marcus Baynes-Rock discusses his experience of relationality with other creatures; a relationality which, he argues, creates a shared understanding of obligations which are characteristically moral.

AB - Are animals moral agents? In this article, a theologian and an anthropologist unite to bring the resources of each field to bear on this question. Alas, not all interdisciplinary conversations end harmoniously, and after much discussion the two authors find themselves in substantial disagreement over the answer. The article is therefore presented in two halves, one for each side of the argument. As well as presenting two different positions, our hope is that this article clarifies the different understandings of morality in our respective fields and will help to offset confusion in interdisciplinary dialogue. In what follows, we each present our case. In the first section, Adam Willows argues that moral activity necessarily involves the use of reason, symbolic thought, and language and is on that basis an exclusively human affair. In the second, Marcus Baynes-Rock discusses his experience of relationality with other creatures; a relationality which, he argues, creates a shared understanding of obligations which are characteristically moral.

U2 - doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464

DO - doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464

M3 - Article

VL - 53

SP - 953

EP - 970

IS - 4

ER -

Willows A, Baynes-Rock M. Two perspectives on animal morality. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. 2018 Dec;53(4):953-970. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12464