DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Predation problem

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác
A snowy owl carries a killed American black duck

The predation problem or predation argument concerns whether the harms experienced by animals through predation should be treated as a moral problem, and whether humans have any obligation to prevent or reduce them. The topic has been discussed mainly in animal ethics and environmental ethics, especially in relation to animal rights and wild animal suffering. Some critics have argued that an obligation to prevent predation is untenable or absurd, and have used it as a reductio ad absurdum against animal rights.[1][2] Others have criticised intervention against predation as environmentally harmful.[3]

Animal ethicists and animal rights theorists have given different responses. Some reject the claim that animal rights imply an obligation to prevent predation,[4][5] while others argue that predation is a harm that humans should try to avert where this can be done without causing greater harm.[6] A further position is that intervention is not currently justified because of the risk of serious unintended harm, but may become possible with improved knowledge and technology.[7]

Historical views

[edit]

Problem of evil

[edit]
See also: Problem of evil § Problem of evil and animal suffering, and Evolutionary theodicy

Predation has been discussed as a natural evil within the problem of evil and as a moral concern in Christian theodicy.[8][9][10] Natural evils have sometimes been treated as harms that humans should alleviate, or as parts of a greater good that justify the existence of such evils.[11] Thomas Aquinas defended the latter view, arguing that "defects" in nature such as predation led to the "good of another, or even to the universal good" and that if "all evil were prevented, much good would be absent from the universe".[12] In Christian and Hebrew Scripture, some prophecies describe a future Heaven or Earth without predation,[13] including Isaiah's prophecy that "[t]he wolf shall live with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them".[14]

In his notebooks, written between 1487 and 1505, Leonardo da Vinci suggested that suffering and death in nature, including plagues and predation, were necessary for renewal and balance in the world, although they could appear unjust or cruel.[15] David Hume referred to predation and the suffering of wild animals in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779), writing that the "stronger prey upon the weaker, and keep them in perpetual terror and anxiety".[16]

William Paley, in Natural Theology, described predation as the part of God's work whose utility was hardest to establish.[17] He nevertheless defended predation as a means of limiting the effects of animals producing more offspring than could survive.[18]

Debate about predation and the problem of evil increased after the popularisation of Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection.[19] Some earlier Christians had treated violence in nature as a result of the fall of man, but evidence that predation existed for millions of years before human beings and the concept of sin indicates that life was never free from violence.[20] Darwin questioned how the fact that Ichneumonidae feed on the bodies of living caterpillars could be reconciled with an omnibenevolent God.[21]

Criticism of moral judgements towards predatory animals

[edit]

Plutarch criticised descriptions of carnivorous animals such as lions, tigers and snakes as barbarous, arguing that killing was necessary for them, while humans could live on "nature's beneficent fruits".[22]

The writer Edward Augustus Kendall discussed predation in his book of moral fables The Canary Bird (1799). He argued that predatory behaviour by animals should not be judged by human moral standards and that "a prejudice against particular creatures, for fancied acts of cruelty is absurd".[23]

Philosophical pessimism

[edit]

Giacomo Leopardi, the Italian poet and philosopher, discussed predation in Operette morali (1827). In "Dialogue between Nature and an Icelander", he used the image of a squirrel fleeing from a rattlesnake only to run into its open mouth as part of a moral indictment of nature. Such cycles of destruction and creation formed part of Leopardi's philosophical pessimism. In Zibaldone, published posthumously in 1898, Leopardi argued that predation showed the evil design of nature.[24]

The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer, writing in 1851, used the suffering of an animal being devoured by another as an argument against the claim that pleasure in the world outweighs pain.[25]

Animal rights

[edit]

Lewis Gompertz, an early animal rights advocate and one of the first modern writers to discuss wild animal suffering, addressed predation in the fifth chapter of Moral Inquiries on the Situation of Man and of Brutes (1824). In a dialogue, he argued that animals devouring each other could be judged wrong by the rules used to govern human conduct, and stated that "should I witness the attempt in any animal of destroying another, I would endeavour to frustrate it; though this might probably be wrong." He also argued that the extinction of carnivorous species would not be bad, because the species of one animal was not more important than an equal number of another, and claimed that some carnivorous animals, such as wolves, could instead live on vegetables.[26]

The American zoologist and animal rights philosopher J. Howard Moore, in the pamphlet Why I Am a Vegetarian (1895), described the carnivora as "relentless brutes" whose existence was contrary to ethics, justice and mercy.[27] In Better-World Philosophy (1899), Moore argued that carnivorousness was the result of excessive egoism produced by natural selection, writing that "Life riots on life-tooth and talon, beak and paw".[28]: 123–125  He also claimed that carnivorous species could not be reconciled with each other in his ideal arrangement of the universe, which he called a "Confederation of the Consciousnesses".[28]: 161–163  In The New Ethics (1907), Moore called carnivorous species "criminal" races whose "existence is a continual menace to the peace and well-being of the world", because the "fullness of their lives is dependent upon the emptiness and destruction of others".[29]

In 1903, the Scottish philosopher David G. Ritchie, responding to Henry S. Salt's Animals' Rights (1892), argued that giving animals rights would imply that humans must "protect the weak among them against the strong". He stated that, to do this, carnivorous animals would have to be killed or kept in "permanent captivity and vegetarian diet" until they starved. Ritchie regarded this as absurd, calling "the declaration of the rights of every creeping thing" a "hypocritical formula to gratify pug-loving sentimentalists".[30]

Contemporary views

[edit]

Animal ethics

[edit]

In 1973, Australian philosopher Peter Singer argued that attempts to stop lions killing gazelles would probably increase the "net amount of animal suffering", but added that if humans could reduce suffering in the long term, intervention would be right.[31]

The English philosopher Stephen R. L. Clark's "The Rights of Wild Things" (1979) is considered one of the first ethics papers to address predation directly as a problem.[32] Clark argues that the idea that humans are obligated to aid animals against predators is not absurd, but that it follows only in the abstract and not in practice.[33]

Tom Regan, in The Case for Animal Rights (1983), argued that humans have no obligation to prevent predation because carnivorous animals are not moral agents and therefore cannot violate the rights of the animals they kill.[34] Julius Kapembwa similarly argues that "intervention in predation is neither required nor permitted by animal rights theory".[4]

Steve Sapontzis, in his 1984 paper "Predation", rejects the view that the predation problem is a reductio ad absurdum against animal rights. He argues that if humans accept an obligation to reduce avoidable animal suffering, then predation is something they should work to prevent where they can do so without causing greater suffering. Sapontzis concludes that whether humans should fulfil this obligation or focus on other forms of avoidable suffering depends on where they can do the most good.[6] In a 2003 paper, the economist Tyler Cowen argues, from utility-based, rights-based and holistic perspectives, for policing nature to reduce some predatory activity and aid prey animals.[35]

The transhumanist philosopher David Pearce, in his 2009 essay "Reprogramming Predators", argues that predation is a major source of suffering and that a "biosphere without suffering is technically feasible". He proposes the phased extinction of carnivorous species through immunocontraceptives, or the use of gene editing so that their descendants become herbivores. Pearce criticises several arguments for preserving predation, including what he calls a "television-based conception of the living world", "[s]elective realism" and "[a]daptive empathy deficits".[36]

In 2010, Jeff McMahan published "The Meat Eaters", an op-ed for the New York Times on predation as a moral issue. He argued that preventing the suffering and death caused by predation would be good, and that the extinction of carnivorous species could be instrumentally good if achieved without "ecological upheaval involving more harm than would be prevented by the end of predation".[37] McMahan responded to objections in another op-ed, "Predators: A Response".[38] He later published his arguments as the chapter "The Moral Problem of Predation" in Philosophy Comes to Dinner (2015).[7]

Peter Vallentyne argues that humans may permissibly help prey in limited ways when the cost to humans is minimal, but should not eliminate predators. He compares such aid to helping humans in need when the cost is small.[39]

Martha Nussbaum argues that the predation problem should be treated as a subject for serious discussion and future research. She argues that people should be persuaded that predation is a problem and that cultural portrayals of predation as exciting or enthralling should be challenged. She also rejects the idea that prey animals exist as food for other animals rather than for their own lives. Nussbaum concludes that humans, who have extensive control over animal lives and habitats, have responsibilities toward wild animals and should work toward their flourishing rather than harming them.[40]

Some ethicists have made specific proposals for reducing or preventing predation, including opposing the reintroduction of predators where they have gone extinct,[41][42] and removing predators from wild areas.[43][44][45]

Environmental ethics

[edit]

In 1984, the British ecologist Felicity A. Huntingford published "Some ethical issues raised by studies of predation and aggression", which discusses ethical questions raised by staging artificial encounters for studies of predator-prey interactions.[46]

In ecology, predation is often treated as a necessary ecological process.[47] This has led some writers, including Michael Pollan, to reject predation as a moral problem; Pollan states that "predation is not a matter of morality or politics; it, also, is a matter of symbiosis".[48] Under Aldo Leopold's land ethic, native predators, as components of biotic communities, are considered worth conserving.[49]

The environmental philosopher J. Baird Callicott argues that animal rights theory would imply protecting animals from predators, and that this would destroy the community and the species meant to be protected. He writes that many prey species depend on predators to regulate their populations.[50] Holmes Rolston III treats predation as an essential natural process and driver of evolution, a "sad good" to be respected and valued.[51][52] Ty Raterman argues that predation can be lamented without implying an obligation to prevent it.[53]

The environmental ethicist William Lynn has argued that, from a welfare perspective, predation "is necessary for the well-being of predators and prey" and for the integrity of ecological communities.[52] Larry Rasmussen, a Christian environmental ethicist, has argued that predation is "not a pattern of morality we praise and advocate".[54]

Other uses of the term

[edit]

"Predation problem" can also refer to predation on animals of economic or conservation value to humans, such as domestic sheep predation by coyotes,[55] farmed salmon predation by seals,[56] predation on animals hunted for sport or food[57] and cat predation of wild animals.[58] Culling or removal of predatory animals may be used to reduce such incidents.[59][60]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Trindade, Gabriel Garmendia da; Woodhall, Andrew, eds. (2020). Intervention or Protest: Acting for Nonhuman Animals. Vernon Press. p. 244. ISBN 978-1-62273-975-2.
  2. ^ Ebert, Rainer; Machan, Tibor R. (2012). "Innocent Threats and the Moral Problem of Carnivorous Animals". Journal of Applied Philosophy. 29 (2): 146–159. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00561.x. ISSN 1468-5930.
  3. ^ Everett, Jennifer (2001). "Environmental Ethics, Animal Welfarism, and the Problem of Predation: A Bambi Lover's Respect for Nature". Ethics and the Environment. 6 (1): 42–67. ISSN 1085-6633. JSTOR 40339003.
  4. ^ a b Kapembwa, Julius (October 2018). "Predation Catch-22: Disentangling the Rights of Prey, Predators, and Rescuers". Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 31 (5): 527–542. Bibcode:2018JAEE...31..527K. doi:10.1007/s10806-018-9743-6. ISSN 1187-7863. S2CID 158949810.
  5. ^ Simmons, Aaron (2009). "Animals, Predators, the Right to Life, and the Duty to Save Lives". Ethics and the Environment. 14 (1): 15–27. doi:10.2979/ETE.2009.14.1.15. ISSN 1085-6633. JSTOR 40339166. S2CID 89542818.
  6. ^ a b Sapontzis, Steve (2011-03-18). "Predation". Ethics and Animals. 5 (2). doi:10.15368/ea.1984v5n2.1. ISSN 0197-9094.
  7. ^ a b McMahan, Jeff (2015-10-08). "The Moral Problem of Predation" (PDF). In Chignell, Andrew; Cuneo, Terence; Halteman, Matthew C (eds.). Philosophy Comes to Dinner. doi:10.4324/9780203154410. ISBN 9781136578076. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-11-11. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  8. ^ Horta, Oscar (2015-05-11). "The Problem of Evil in Nature: Evolutionary Bases of the Prevalence of Disvalue". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (1) 1: 17–32. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-001-hort. ISSN 2280-9643.
  9. ^ Seacord, Beth Anne (2013). Unto the Least of These: Animal Suffering and the Problem of Evil (Thesis). University of Colorado Boulder.
  10. ^ Lamoureux, Denis O. (2020-01-02). "Toward an Evangelical Evolutionary Theodicy". Theology and Science. 18 (1): 12–30. doi:10.1080/14746700.2019.1710347. ISSN 1474-6700. S2CID 213720979.
  11. ^ Kowalsky, Nathan (2017-11-24). "Predation, Pain, and Evil: Anti-hunting as Theodicy". Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses. 46 (4): 489–510. doi:10.1177/0008429817732032. ISSN 0008-4298. S2CID 149221324.
  12. ^ Magee, Joseph (2020-02-09). "Problem of Evil". Thomistic Philosophy Page. Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  13. ^ Murray, Michael J. (2008). Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 77. ISBN 978-0-19-923727-2. OCLC 209815655.
  14. ^ Isaiah 11:6–9
  15. ^ Leonardo da Vinci (2004-01-01). The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci — Complete. Translated by Richter, Jean Paul. folio 1219.
  16. ^ Hume, David (1779). Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. London. pp. 176.
  17. ^ Paley, William (1879) [1802]. Paxton, James; Ware, John (eds.). Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. New York: Sheldon & Company. p. 265.
  18. ^ Gregory, T. Ryan (December 2009). "The Argument from Design: A Guided Tour of William Paley's Natural Theology (1802)". Evolution: Education and Outreach. 2 (4): 602–611. doi:10.1007/s12052-009-0184-6. ISSN 1936-6434.
  19. ^ Fleck, Robert K. (2011). "Natural Selection and the Problem of Evil: An Evolutionary Model with Application to an Ancient Debate". Zygon. 46 (3): 561–587. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2011.01199.x. ISSN 1467-9744.
  20. ^ McDaniel, Jay B. (1998). "Can Animal Suffering be Reconciled with Belief in an All-Loving God?". In Linzey, Andrew; Yamamoto, Dorothy (eds.). Animals on the Agenda: Questions About Animals for Theology and Ethics (Illini books ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press. p. 162. ISBN 0-252-06761-4. OCLC 38948168.
  21. ^ Sterba, James P. (2019-03-04). "Solving Darwin's Problem of Natural Evil". Sophia. 59 (3): 501–512. doi:10.1007/s11841-019-0704-y. ISSN 1873-930X. S2CID 171882342.
  22. ^ Nearing, Helen (1999). Simple Food for the Good Life. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. p. 41. ISBN 978-1-890132-29-3.
  23. ^ Spencer, Jane (2010-12-01). "Creating Animal Experience in Late Eighteenth-Century Narrative" (PDF). Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies. 33 (4). University of Exeter: 469–486. doi:10.1111/j.1754-0208.2010.00318.x. hdl:10871/11724. pp. 6–7
  24. ^ Pedatella, Stefan (2009-03-01). "Images of Animal Predation in Giacomo Leopardi's Dialogo della Natura e di un Islandese". Italian Culture. 27 (1): 25–42. doi:10.1179/155909009X401665. ISSN 0161-4622. S2CID 159793645.
  25. ^ Schopenhauer, Arthur (2000). Parerga and Paralipomena: Short Philosophical Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 292. ISBN 9780199242214.
  26. ^ Gompertz, Lewis (1992). Singer, Peter (ed.). Moral Inquiries on the Situation of Man and of Brutes. Fontwell: Centaur Press. pp. 93–95. ISBN 978-0-900001-37-6.
  27. ^ Moore, J. Howard (1895). Why I Am a Vegetarian. Chicago: Frances L. Dusenberry. pp. 30–41.
  28. ^ a b Moore, John Howard (1899). Better-world Philosophy: A Sociological Synthesis. Chicago: The Ward Waugh Co.
  29. ^ Moore, J. Howard (1909). The New Ethics. Chicago: S. A. Bloch. p. 141.
  30. ^ Ritchie, David George (1903). Natural Rights: A Criticism of Some Political and Ethical Conceptions. London: Swan Sonnenschein. pp. 109–110.
  31. ^ Singer, Peter; Rosinger, David (1973-06-14). "Food for Thought". The New York Review of Books. ISSN 0028-7504. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  32. ^ Keulartz, Jozef (2016-10-01). "Should the Lion Eat Straw Like the Ox? Animal Ethics and the Predation Problem". Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 29 (5): 813–834. Bibcode:2016JAEE...29..813K. doi:10.1007/s10806-016-9637-4. hdl:2066/161423. ISSN 1573-322X. S2CID 5918938.
  33. ^ Clark, Stephen R. L. (1979-01-01). "The Rights of Wild Things". Inquiry. 22 (1–4): 171–188. doi:10.1080/00201747908601871. ISSN 0020-174X.
  34. ^ Fink, Charles (2005-08-01). "The Predation Argument". Between the Species. 13 (5). doi:10.15368/bts.2005v13n5.3.
  35. ^ Cowen, Tyler (2003). "Policing Nature" (PDF). Environmental Ethics. 25 (2): 169–182. Bibcode:2003EnEth..25..169C. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200325231. ISSN 0163-4275.
  36. ^ Pearce, David (2009). "Reprogramming Predators: the case for high-tech Jainism and a pan-species welfare state". Hedweb. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  37. ^ McMahan, Jeff (2010-09-19). "The Meat Eaters". Opinionator. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  38. ^ McMahan, Jeff (2010-09-28). "Predators: A Response". Opinionator. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  39. ^ Verchot, Manon. "Meet the people who want to turn predators into herbivores". TreeHugger. Retrieved 2019-10-29.
  40. ^ Nussbaum, Martha C. (2022-12-08). "A Peopled Wilderness". The New York Review. ISSN 0028-7504. Retrieved 2023-01-06.
  41. ^ Sagoff, Mark (1984). "Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics: Bad Marriage, Quick Divorce". Osgoode Hall Law Journal. 22 (2): 297–307. doi:10.60082/2817-5069.1936.
  42. ^ Horta, Oscar (2010). "The Ethics of the Ecology of Fear against the Nonspeciesist Paradigm A Shift in the Aims of Intervention in Nature". Between the Species. 13 (10): 163–187. doi:10.15368/bts.2010v13n10.10.
  43. ^ MacAskill, William; MacAskill, Amanda (9 September 2015). "To Truly End Animal Suffering, the Most Ethical Choice is To Kill Wild Predators (Especially Cecil the Lion)". Quartz. Retrieved 17 April 2016.
  44. ^ Grush, Loren (2015-09-10). "Killing off wild predators is a stupid idea". The Verge. Retrieved 2019-10-29.
  45. ^ Bramble, Ben (2020). "Painlessly Killing Predators". Journal of Applied Philosophy. 38 (2): 217–225. doi:10.1111/japp.12461. ISSN 1468-5930. S2CID 224855806.
  46. ^ Huntingford, Felicity A. (1984-02-01). "Some ethical issues raised by studies of predation and aggression". Animal Behaviour. 32 (1): 210–215. Bibcode:1984AnBeh..32..210H. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(84)80339-5. ISSN 0003-3472. S2CID 53174615.
  47. ^ Fraser, Caroline (2011-09-15). "The Crucial Role of Predators: A New Perspective on Ecology". Yale E360. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  48. ^ Pollan, Michael (2002-11-10). "An Animal's Place". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  49. ^ Hargrove, Eugene C., ed. (1992). The Animal Rights/Environmental Ethics Debate: The Environmental Perspective. Albany, New York: SUNY Press. p. 44. ISBN 978-0-7914-0933-6.
  50. ^ Callicott, J. (1988-07-01). "Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics: Back Together Again". Between the Species. 4 (3). doi:10.15368/bts.1988v4n3.1.
  51. ^ Hettinger, Ned (1994). "Valuing Predation in Rolston's Environmental Ethics: Bambi Lovers versus Tree Huggers" (PDF). Environmental Ethics. 16 (1): 3–20. doi:10.5840/enviroethics199416138. ISSN 0163-4275.
  52. ^ a b Lynn, William (2006-09-01). "Sad Goods". William Lynn. Retrieved 2020-07-08.
  53. ^ Raterman, Ty (Winter 2008). "An Environmentalist's Lament on Predation" (PDF). Environmental Ethics. 30 (4): 417–434. Bibcode:2008EnEth..30..417R. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200830443.
  54. ^ Sideris, Lisa H. (2003). Environmental Ethics, Ecological Theology, and Natural Selection. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 175. ISBN 978-0-231-12661-8.
  55. ^ Ellins, Stuart R. (1985-09-01). "Coyote control and taste aversion: A predation problem or a people problem?". Appetite. 6 (3): 272–275. doi:10.1016/S0195-6663(85)80017-9. ISSN 0195-6663. PMID 3000296. S2CID 35924539.
  56. ^ Hawkins, A. D. (November 1985). Seal Predation at Salmon Farms (PDF) (Report). Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland. Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  57. ^ Reynolds, J. C.; Tapper, S. C. (1996). "Control of mammalian predators in game management and conservation". Mammal Review. 26 (2–3): 127–155. Bibcode:1996MamRv..26..127R. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.1996.tb00150.x. ISSN 1365-2907.
  58. ^ Carey, John (2017-10-19). "The Cat Conundrum". National Wildlife Federation. Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  59. ^ Swan, George Julius Fraser (2017-11-13). Understanding conservation conflicts surrounding predation and game shooting interests (Thesis). University of Exeter.
  60. ^ Blejwas, Karen M.; Sacks, Benjamin N.; Jaeger, Michael M.; McCullough, Dale R. (April 2002). "The Effectiveness of Selective Removal of Breeding Coyotes in Reducing Sheep Predation". The Journal of Wildlife Management. 66 (2): 451. Bibcode:2002JWMan..66..451B. doi:10.2307/3803178. JSTOR 3803178.

Further reading

[edit]