Show simple item record

Dependent Companions

dc.contributor.authorMilligan, Tony
dc.date.accessioned2013-12-16T12:30:13Z
dc.date.available2013-12-16T12:30:13Z
dc.date.issued2009-11
dc.identifier.citationMilligan , T 2009 , ' Dependent Companions ' , Journal of Applied Philosophy , vol. 26 , no. 4 , pp. 402-413 . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2009.00460.x
dc.identifier.issn1468-5930
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 2463491
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: a15cc39d-cdb2-4241-838c-1b4b902af145
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85037742024
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/12328
dc.description.abstractMy primary concern will be to cast light upon the relation between animal guardians (‘pet owners’) and pets as a deep relation. I will proceed with a degree of indirectness by explaining why animal guardians can have an epistemically-privileged position when it comes to end-of-life decisions concerning pets. My contention is that they are best placed to grasp the relevant narrative considerations upon which end-of-life deliberation in marginal cases ought to depend. Such narrative-appreciation is built into the practice of treating animals as pets. By virtue of having such a narrative appreciation, animal guardians can be best placed to grasp the life-role of pain and suffering.en
dc.format.extent12
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Applied Philosophy
dc.subjectanimals
dc.subjectpets
dc.subjectcompanion animals
dc.subjectethics
dc.subjectArts and Humanities(all)
dc.titleDependent Companionsen
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Humanities
dc.contributor.institutionSocial Sciences, Arts & Humanities Research Institute
dc.contributor.institutionPhilosophy
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2009.00460.x
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record