Many people think that animal liberation would require a fundamental
transformation of basic beliefs. We would have to give up "speciesism"
and start viewing animals as our equals, with rights and moral status.
And we would have to apply these beliefs in an all-or-nothing way. But
in Ethics and the Beast, Tzachi Zamir makes the radical argument that
animal liberation doesn't require such radical arguments--and that
liberation could be accomplished in a flexible and pragmatic way. By
making a case for liberation that is based primarily on common moral
intuitions and beliefs, and that therefore could attract wide
understanding and support, Zamir attempts to change the terms of the
liberation debate.
Without defending it, Ethics and the Beast claims that speciesism is
fully compatible with liberation. Even if we believe that we should
favor humans when there is a pressing human need at stake, Zamir argues,
that does not mean that we should allow marginal human interests to
trump the life-or-death interests of animals. As minimalist as it
sounds, this position generates a robust liberation program, including
commitments not to eat animals, subject them to factory farming, or use
them in medical research. Zamir also applies his arguments to some
questions that tend to be overlooked in the liberation debate, such as
whether using animals can be distinguished from exploiting them, whether
liberationists should be moral vegetarians or vegans, and whether using
animals for therapeutic purposes is morally blameless.
