Bewildering Nussbaum: Capability Justice and Predation*

Hailwood, Simon

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00392.x

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…So far, we have argued that only humans have obigations vis-à-vis justice, but here, we face difficult dilemmas about whether this also entails obligations to intervene in the relationships between other beings. While justice cannot demand human intervention in all conflicts in the nonhuman realm (Hailwood 2012), conservation efforts have long faced dilemmas about whether it is ethical to kill some beings (often those designated as 'feral' or 'invasive') in order to enable others ('native', 'endangered') to survive (Ramp and Bekoff 2015).…”

Section: Conflict and Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics

Celermajer

Schlosberg

Rickards

et al. 2020

Environmental Politics

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay seeks to open a conversation about multispecies justice in environmental politics. It sets out some of the theoretical approaches, key areas of exploration, and obvious challenges that come with rethinking a core plank of liberal theory and politics. First, we discuss some of the diverse scholarly fields that have influenced the emergence of multispecies justice. We then discuss core concerns at the centre of this reconfiguration of justice-including broadening conceptions of the subject of justice and the means and processes of recognition (and misrecognition). The importance of deconstructing and decolonising the hegemony of liberal political discourse is crucial, and is part of a larger project for multispecies justice to rework a politics of knowledge and practice of political communication. Finally, we begin to explore what a commitment to multispecies justice might demand of politics and policy. KEYWORDS Multispecies justice; environmental justice; environmental political theory Introduction: laying out the terrain of multispecies justice We began this in the midst of a fossil-fueled climate disaster. Bushfires raged across Australia laying waste to ecosystems and billions of the nonhuman beings and relationships that make up this place. This reality is neither a natural disaster nor a tragedy, but injustice-albeit injustice that cannot be contained by standard notions of that concept. The impacts of these and other ecological disasters generated by industrialization and capitalism demand an approach to idea and practice of justice that can encompass and respond to the destruction of multispecies lifeways. Here, we lay out an introduction to multispecies justice (MSJ), suggest theoretical approaches that contribute to it, key areas of exploration, and the challenges of rethinking justice.

show abstract

Section: Conflict and Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics

Celermajer

Schlosberg

Rickards

et al. 2020

Environmental Politics

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the whole, then, the only thing holding animal ethics back from a full endorsement of anti-predatory interventions is practical feasibility. For Nussbaum (and contra Singer and Regan), the autonomy of predators is overridden by the fundamental and untradeable claim prey have to their threshold capability entitlements (Hailwood, 2012: 298), so the only issue is to what extent reality can be fitted to principle. Marcel Wissenburg argues that Nussbaum commits herself to the maxim “ought implies ‘make it so’” (Wissenburg, 2011: 397): in so far as a contingent reality stands in the way of the performance of justice, our duty is to do whatever is in our power to remove that obstacle.…”

Section: Valuing Predationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predation, Pain, and Evil

Kowalsky

2017

Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The classical problem of natural evil holds that the suffering of sentient beings caused by natural processes is an evil for which a divinity is morally responsible. Theodicies either explain natural evil as a punitive imperfection in nature, which humans ought to avoid and/or purify, or as a constituent part of a greater good whereby the evil is redeemed. The environmental ethics literature has taken the latter route with respect to the secular problem of natural evil, arguing that local disvalues such as predation or pain are transmuted into systemic-level ecological goods. The anti-hunting literature takes the former route, arguing that humans should not participate in the predatory aspects of the natural order. The anti-predation literature, furthermore, argues that nature should be redeemed – so far as is technologically and economically possible – of its unsavoury predatory aspects. While all sides of the debate employ strategies analogous to those found in the philosophy of religion, the immanentizing function of secularism moves the target of ultimate moral evaluation away from the divine and onto the natural. Environmental ethics’ teleological approach culminates with nature as a transcendent good, whereas anti-hunting and anti-predation critiques view nature in the here-and-now as riven with evil, requiring humans to distance themselves while decontaminating it.

show abstract

“…We recognize that there is little or no pristine wilderness, but as Simon Hailwood notes, relative degrees of wilderness matter. There are still many spaces on Earth where wild animals can live independently with limited impacts from humans, though climate change is rapidly altering the calculus(Hailwood 2012 ).12 In the article cited by Janara, Paul Nasdady says that "Hunting in such[indigenous] societies should not be viewed as a violent process whereby hunters take the lives of animals by force. Rather, hunting is more appropriately viewed as a long-term relationship of reciprocal exchange between animals and the humans who hunt them"(Nasdady 2007 : 25).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 11 We recognize that there is little or no pristine wilderness, but as Simon Hailwood notes, relative degrees of wilderness matter. There are still many spaces on Earth where wild animals can live independently with limited impacts from humans, though climate change is rapidly altering the calculus (Hailwood 2012). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply: Animal Citizenship, Liberal Theory and the Historical Moment

Donaldson

Kymlicka

2013

Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We begin this reply by addressing some of the broader questions about the goal of our 'political theory of animals'-what it is we're trying to achieve-before turning to some of the commentators' more focused questions and challenges, particularly about regulating reproduction. It might be helpful to briefl y restate one of the central gaps in existing animal rights theories (hereafter ART) that we hope to remedy. A point of consensus that all defenders of animal rights share is that the history of humananimal relations is one of domination and exploitation. Throughout history, and around the world, humans have exercised power over animals in ways that subordinate animal interests to human interests, sacrifi cing animals to serve human purposes. The goal of the animal advocacy movement is to stop this domination and exploitation. But how do we stop it? For many defenders of ART, there is a single, simple answer: we stop exercising power over animals. The goal is not to exercise power more responsibly or more justly, but to renounce power entirely. We simply "let them be", leaving animals to live freely on their own, following their natural inclinations. 1 This assumption runs deep in traditional animal rights theory-in Zoopolis , we quote several examples from leading ART theorists (Francione, Regan,

show abstract

Bewildering Nussbaum: Capability Justice and Predation*

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics

Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics

Predation, Pain, and Evil

Reply: Animal Citizenship, Liberal Theory and the Historical Moment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About