Laboratory animals and the art of empathy

Consistency is the hallmark of a coherent ethical philosophy. When considering the morality of particular behaviour, one should look to identify comparable situations and test one’s approach to the former against one’s approach to the latter. The obvious comparator for animal experiments is non-cons...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Thomas, D. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2005
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2005, Volume: 31, Issue: 4, Pages: 197-202
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1816128287
003 DE-627
005 20220908053410.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/jme.2003.006387  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816128287 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816128287 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Thomas, D.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Laboratory animals and the art of empathy 
264 1 |c 2005 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Consistency is the hallmark of a coherent ethical philosophy. When considering the morality of particular behaviour, one should look to identify comparable situations and test one’s approach to the former against one’s approach to the latter. The obvious comparator for animal experiments is non-consensual experiments on people. In both cases, suffering and perhaps death is knowingly caused to the victim, the intended beneficiary is someone else, and the victim does not consent. Animals suffer just as people do. As we condemn non-consensual experiments on people, we should, if we are to be consistent, condemn non-consensual experiments on animals. The alleged differences between the two practices often put forward do not stand up to scrutiny. The best guide to ethical behaviour is empathy—putting oneself in the potential victim’s shoes. Again to be consistent, we should empathise with all who may be adversely affected by our behaviour. By this yardstick, too, animal experiments fail the ethical test. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 31(2005), 4, Seite 197-202  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:31  |g year:2005  |g number:4  |g pages:197-202 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/27719374  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/31/4/197.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via free pdf)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2003.006387  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/31/4/197.abstract  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 31  |j 2005  |e 4  |h 197-202 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185582137 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816128287 
LOK |0 005 20220908053410 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-02#2AA1A1F1A66381215DFCD037713327853448EEBE 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/27719374 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw