Animals and Why They Matter [Paperback]

Mary Midgley (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0820320412 | ISBN-13: 978-0820320410 | Publication Date: September 1, 1998

Animals and Why They Matter examines the barriers that our philosophical traditions have erected between human beings and animals and reveals that the too-often ridiculed subject of animal rights is an issue crucially related to such problems within the human community as racism, sexism, and age discrimination. Mary Midgley's profound and clearly written narrative is a thought-provoking study of the way in which the opposition between reason and emotion has shaped our moral and political ideas and the problems it has raised. Whether considering vegetarianism, women's rights, or the "humanity" of pets, this book goes to the heart of the question of why all animals matter.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"This is a good and readable, though not easy, book, and it is written with such sincerity that it will force readers to consider more deeply the question of exactly what sort of rights animals—human beings included—have."--Christian Science Monitor

"Midgley demolishes some of the most frequently heard arguments against the protection of animals."--New York Review of Books

"Brings together two intellectual currents: an increased scientific understanding and public appreciation of animals, and an increasing tendency by philosophers to extend moral questions beyond the barrier of our own species."--Smithsonian

"Her treatment of vegetarianism and her treatment of the question of women's rights as a parallel to animals' rights are brilliant."--Frederick Ferré, author of Philosophy of Technology

About the Author

Mary Midgley is the author of Beast and Man and Heart and Mind. She lives in Newcastle on Tyne, England.

Product Details

• Paperback: 160 pages
• Publisher: University of Georgia Press (September 1, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0820320412
• ISBN-13: 978-0820320410
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.4 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 5.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #708,061 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

107 of 108 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A must for anyone interested in Animals & Ethics, March 2, 1998

By 

Robert Moore (Chicago, IL USA) - See all my reviews
(HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (VINE VOICE)    (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Animals and Why They Matter (Paperback)

When I taught a course on Animals and Ethics, I chose this volume over all others as my primary text. While Peter Singer's ANIMAL LIBERATION first awoke my consciousness to the tragedy of the manner in which humans have regarded and treated animals, I found the philosophical underpinnings of his work (a form of utilitarianism) troublesome (for reasons I won't go into here). On the other hand, I found Tom Regan's THE CASE FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS, to be far too Kantian. Midgley discusses a wide-ranging group of philosophers, but doesn't overly attach herself to any particular moral philosophy. As a result, she is less doctrinaire than any of the other major writers on the topic. The book reeks of common sense, in the way that the English so often seem to have mastered. Just a wonderful, unjustly neglected book.

20 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Philosophising about animals, February 26, 2005

By 

Ralph Blumenau (London United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: Animals and Why They Matter (Paperback)

Mary Midgley examines the general principles that ought to guide our attitude to animals. Midgley quotes a large number of philosophers who in the past have philosophized about animals. Some of them have considered the question of what obligations, if any, we have towards animals. Their answers have depended both on what they take an animal to be and on what they consider to be the cause, the nature and the range of obligations. Descartes, for example, considered that, because animals lacked souls and, more importantly, reasoning faculties, they are mere machines. Even in Descartes' day, such a conclusion must have seemed very odd to anyone who had much to do with animals: for even if one agreed that they did lack souls and reasoning faculties, any farmer or hunter could have told Descartes that relationships with animals are radically different from relationships with machines. But even writers of our own time, while not thinking of animals as machines, still deny them the capacity of thought: R.G.Frey because thought requires language and animals cannot speak; Stuart Hampshire because in the absence of language they cannot have concepts. Yet the simplest observations of how animals communicate with each other and even with humans would seem to suggest that thought, concepts and reasoning do not depend totally on a human language.

Behaviourists go even further: we cannot even be sure that animals have feelings. The denial of thought and feelings to animals serve to erect such a strong barrier between the human and the animal species that we can exclude the animal species from the obligations we feel towards our fellow human beings. One of the most striking part of Midgley's book is her demonstration how easily past generations were able to overlook even other humans as belonging to a group towards which they had obligations. Thus the Athenians, who prided themselves on civic equality, and the Americans who proclaimed that all men were created equal, simply assumed that slaves did not count as humans: indeed Aristotle described slaves as being merely "living instruments". The Chartists demanded universal suffrage for men, but either did not even think of extending that demand to women or, if they did, found some rationalization for excluding them. The excluded groups were, in Midgley's words, consigned to the outer darkness, beyond the outer periphery of a group towards the members of which certain obligations were recognized. In the 20th century, denials of full membership of the group and the discrimination which this entails have been condemned under the name of various kinds of "-isms": racism for denying membership to other races, sexism for denying it to women, ageism for denying it to the old - and now speciesism for denying it to animals. Midgley's book is a sign that the time has come to widen the periphery of our obligations to include animals.

Midgley admits that it is natural to be more concerned with those who are closest to us, and she has a diagram of concentric circles to illustrate that we are concerned most immediately with our family, then with our tribe, then with our nation, then with our species, and only then with non-human species. We often treat appallingly badly and cast into the "outer darkness" human groups that are outside the smaller circles; but any ethically sensitive person has to condemn such behaviour: charity, as the proverb has it, begins at home, but it ought not to stop there. This is the principle that should also apply when we consider the outer circle of the non-human species.

Midgley's tone is always moderate and she never takes up the position of radical or extreme zoophiles who would want us to give to all animals exactly the same rights as we give to humans. She accepts that there must be some priority of considerations and that there can be situations where it is reasonable for us to put the interests of humans before those of animals, though she says that such cases are much fewer than is often supposed. They would include, for example, dealing with locusts and other pests. She does not go into specific details about killing animals for food; but one can deduce from her text that she would accept that Eskimoes cannot be vegetarians and are therefore justified to kill for food, and that she does not condemn pastoral societies who treat their animals well prior to slaughtering them. On the other hand she clearly abhors stuffing geese to produce paté de foie gras. She states the general principle that great suffering inflicted on animals on the outer periphery ought to weigh against the minor advantage that this might bring to those within the inner circles.

One would like to think that at the end of her examination, Midgley had arrived at positions which most sensitive people would have reached without all that philosophizing, guided merely by their humanity and common sense. Most of them would understand instinctively why animals matter; but unfortunately many people give this understanding such a low priority that as citizens they do not do enough to take on the vested interests and those who are too apathetic to care very much. Perhaps this well-written and wise little book would stir them into action.

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Primer, July 7, 2008

By 

Bob Swain "Seattle" (Seattle) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Animals and Why They Matter (Paperback)

Robert Moore above says it all, but I just wanted to add that this is one of the best philosophy books I've ever read. I teach philosophy so that's a big thing to say. The philosophy of the writer Midgley is very very sharp and although it's common sense in some cases, Midgley has extraordinary common sense.

While the French are fruit loops and the Americans dry as dust in philosophy, Midgley operates out of a witty but kind, sharp but not prickly, Britishness, that is too often as Moore put it, unjustly neglected.

If you're tired of stupid Deleuze and mindless Foucault, as well as erudite but incomprehensible Peirce, open up Midgley. Midgley, Midgley, Midgley!

I've read three of her books in a row, and this one is by far the best. Midgley is right on the money in every sentence throughout this book.

Bravura performance without a trace of Deleuzian diva-dom.

Somehow she gets you to see that animals aren't that different from us (at least among the social species of animal such as cats and dogs and simians) and she also provides us with a primer of philosophers on animal and women's rights in tight little nuggets that are highly condensed and yet insatiably readable. This is the book for anyone interested in teaching a course on animal rights. Nothing else will do.