In her very interesting paper, “Peter Singer on Expendability,” L. A. Kemmerer re-examines Peter Singer’s utilitarian argument implying that some being are replaceable and the implications of this argument for the issue of treating animals. I attempt to defend Singer, and more generally utilitarianism (including the principle of replaceability), against these objections. I argue that, given a utilitarian outlook, some animals are indeed replaceable. But I also argue that few animals are replaceable in practice.
"Utilitarianism and Replaceability or Are Animals Expendable?,"
Between the Species:
1, Article 5.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/bts/vol14/iss1/5