Questão
de Ética
PT

Simplified version · Volume V · chapter 6

Animal advocacy and environmentalism: the divergence is ethical, not scientific

In plain language, for readers who are new to the topic. About 2 min of reading.

What is this page? A simplified explanation written for this site based on Luciano Carlos Cunha’s text. It leaves out details, examples and sources. For the full argument, read the author’s original text.

A mix-up

Many people think environmentalism is "the scientific position" because it uses ecology. And that animal advocacy would be less scientific.

Science describes; ethics picks the goal

Ecology is a science: it studies how species, populations, and ecosystems work. But science describes how the world is. It doesn't tell us, on its own, what we should want.

What we learn from ecology can be used for many different goals:

  • human goals (for example, producing more food);
  • environmental goals (preserving native species);
  • and also helping animals.

So using ecology doesn't automatically make anyone an environmentalist.

Welfare biology

Today, almost all ecological knowledge is used for human or environmental goals. That's why researchers are proposing a new field: welfare biology.

It would bring together ecology, animal welfare science, zoology, the study of animal behavior, and veterinary medicine.

In short

  • Science describes; values decide what to use it for.
  • Ecology can also be used to help animals.
  • Welfare biology is the science focused on the good of animals in the wild.

Next step

Now you are ready for the full text

The author’s text gives the arguments in detail, with examples, objections and the sources for every claim.

Read the original text