Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned2021-03-09T09:53:52Z
dc.date.available2021-03-09T09:53:52Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/47111
dc.description.abstractGiven that there is currently no consensus as to exactly which animals are sentient, how should we make moral decisions when we are uncertain as to which of the animals influenced by that decision are sentient? And how relevant is evidence from the neurosciences for making these decisions? In this chapter, I outline three different approaches toward incorporating uncertainty about sentience into moral decision-making: what I call precise, precautionary, and probabilistic approaches to sentience. I suggest that neuroscientific evidence has different relevance for each of these accounts. Precautionary approaches should be adopted to provide basic protections for animals even when we are uncertain about their sentience, but probabilistic accounts are more relevant for decisions where we need to carefully weigh positive and negative consequences of different possible decisions. Precise accounts can be useful for providing guidance but are not directly relevant for making decisions or guiding policy.en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::P Mathematics and Science::PS Biology, life sciences::PSA Life sciences: general issues::PSAN Neurosciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherSentience, Consciousness, Arguments by analogy, Precautionary principleen_US
dc.titleChapter 13 The Role of Neuroscience in Precise, Precautionary, and Probabilistic Accounts of Sentienceen_US
dc.typechapter
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy6c6992af-b843-4f46-859c-f6e9998e40d5en_US
oapen.relation.isPartOfBook6d802550-49a0-49a3-ba19-796c5150e0deen_US
oapen.relation.isFundedByd859fbd3-d884-4090-a0ec-baf821c9abfden_US
oapen.collectionWellcomeen_US
oapen.pages13en_US
oapen.grant.number203132/Z/16/Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record