Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Bostock Replies to Zamir

Bostock Replies to Zamir © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2008 DOI: 10.1163/156853008X291453 Society and Animals 16 (2008) 185-187 www.brill.nl/soan Bostock Replies to Zamir Stephen Bostock Honorary Research Fellow, University of Glasgow, 69 Oakfield Avenue, Glasgow, G12 8LT, Scotland, U.K. mail@stephenbostock.fsnet.co.uk Tzachi Zamir, in his article “Th e Welfare-based Defense of Zoos” ( Society & Animals , 2007, pp. 191-201), argues that, while companion animals and ani- mals on the farm can be kept and used in an acceptable way rather than exploited, this is not the case with animals in zoos. His argument for the unac- ceptability of zoos includes an examination and rebuttal of my (as he calls it) “welfare-based defense of zoos” in my Zoos and Animal Rights (1993). I con- sider that zoos at their best do not merit Zamir’s condemnation, but in any case his account of my views is seriously flawed at two points. (Page refer- ences—unless otherwise stated—will be to Zamir’s article.) I agree with Zamir’s view that the paternalism involved both in keeping companion animals and in keeping farm animals can be justified (pp. 193, 194). I also accept his initial outline of my position, that four main criteria for judging well being are degrees http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Society & Animals Brill

Bostock Replies to Zamir

Society & Animals , Volume 16 (2): 185 – Jan 1, 2008

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/bostock-replies-to-zamir-TlHDmacgJ1

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2008 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1063-1119
eISSN
1568-5306
DOI
10.1163/156853008X291453
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2008 DOI: 10.1163/156853008X291453 Society and Animals 16 (2008) 185-187 www.brill.nl/soan Bostock Replies to Zamir Stephen Bostock Honorary Research Fellow, University of Glasgow, 69 Oakfield Avenue, Glasgow, G12 8LT, Scotland, U.K. mail@stephenbostock.fsnet.co.uk Tzachi Zamir, in his article “Th e Welfare-based Defense of Zoos” ( Society & Animals , 2007, pp. 191-201), argues that, while companion animals and ani- mals on the farm can be kept and used in an acceptable way rather than exploited, this is not the case with animals in zoos. His argument for the unac- ceptability of zoos includes an examination and rebuttal of my (as he calls it) “welfare-based defense of zoos” in my Zoos and Animal Rights (1993). I con- sider that zoos at their best do not merit Zamir’s condemnation, but in any case his account of my views is seriously flawed at two points. (Page refer- ences—unless otherwise stated—will be to Zamir’s article.) I agree with Zamir’s view that the paternalism involved both in keeping companion animals and in keeping farm animals can be justified (pp. 193, 194). I also accept his initial outline of my position, that four main criteria for judging well being are degrees

Journal

Society & AnimalsBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2008

There are no references for this article.