Files and links (2)
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0, Open Access
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0, Open
Journal article
What would the Babel fish say?
Animal Sentience, Vol.1(3), pp.1-4
01/01/2016
Metrics
5 File views/ downloads
5 Record Views
Abstract
Starting with its title, Key's (2016) target article advocates the view that fish do not feel pain. The author describes the neuroanatomical, physiological and behavioural conditions involved in the experience of pain in humans and rodents and confidently applies analogical arguments as though they were established facts in support of the negative conclusion about the inability of fish to feel pain. The logical reasoning, unfortunately, becomes somewhat incoherent, with the arbitrary application of the designated human criteria for an analogical argument to one animal species (e.g., rodents) but not another (fish). Research findings are reported selectively, and questionable interpretations are invoked to support the author's position. In this commentary, I briefly examine two of the analogies presented in Key's target article and highlight the role (and consequences) that personal opinions and preconceptions have in issues concerning human ethical responsibilities toward the welfare of non-human species.
Details
- Title
- What would the Babel fish say?
- Creators
- Monica Gagliano - University of Western Australia
- Publication Details
- Animal Sentience, Vol.1(3), pp.1-4
- Publisher
- WellBeing International
- Identifiers
- 991013006898802368
- Copyright
- This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Academic Unit
- Faculty of Science and Engineering; Science
- Language
- English
- Resource Type
- Journal article