JonathanCooper

Drexler
Phil2300
12/7/2014
Fishandthemoralcircle
Throughoutthisclasstherehasbeenmanydifferentdiscussionsonthemoralcircle.
Thesediscussionsrangefromwhatthemoralcircleis,towhofitsinthatcircle.Thistopicis
especiallyvalidwhentalkingabouthowhumanstreattheenvironmentaroundthembecause
itdictateswhatismoralandimmoralinregardstotreatmentofplants,animals,andthe
environment.Outofthemanydiscussionsthathavebeenhadaboutifandhowanimalsfitin
themoralcircleisifspecificanimalsfitintothemoralcircle.Whilesomemaysaythatany
animalregardlessofcognitiveabilitywillfitintothemoralcircle,otherssaythatitmaydepend
ontheanimalastowhetherornotitwillfitintothecircle.InthispaperIamgoingtoexamine
thespecialcaseoffishandwheretheywouldandwouldnotfitintothemoralcircle.
Themoralcircleistermusedinphilosophytodefinewhatthingsgetmoral
consideration.Thismeansthatthosethingsinsidethemoralcirclemusthaveitsneeds
consideredaspartofonesmorality.Thiscouldbetruewithanythingthatfitsintothemoral
circle.Ifhumansfitintothemoralcircle,thenhumansneedsmustbeaddressedwhen
dealingwiththem.Ifanimalsfitintothecircle,thentheirneedsmustbeconsideredaswell.
Thus,anythingthatfitsintothemoralcirclemustfirsthaveareasontobeinthemoralcircle
andsecondhaveintrinsicvalue.Thesetwoqualifiersarethebeginningofthedebateforwhat
fitsintothemoralcircle.Whilesomemightsaythatanimalshavenointrinsicvalueandare
onlyatoolforhumans,othersmightsaythatanimalshavevalueoutsideofhumansusefor
themandthusfitintothemoralcircle.Inthispaperwewillbetalkingaboutfish.Insome

respects,fishmakeupaninterestingdebateabouttheirplaceinthemoralcircle.One
importantaspectthatwewilldiscusistheviewthatallanimalshaveaplaceinthemoral
circle.Wewillalsolookintowhyfishmaynotfitintothemoralcircle.
Therehavebeenmanyphilosopherswhohavediscussedmoralityandhowtodeal
withothersandwhiletheymayhavenotnecessarilymeantanimals,itmaybeusefultolook
intowhatsomenotablemoralphilosophershadtosayonthematter.Firstly,Renedescartes
hadafamouspaperthatdiddirecthisthoughtsdirectlyatanimalsandtheirplaceoutsidethe
moralcircle.Descartesbelievedthatanimalswereessentiallysoullessmachines.He
thoughtthattheyneitherhadconsciousnessnorwerecapableofpainandsuffering.This
meanttoDescartesatleastthatanimalswouldcertainlynottobeplacedinthemoralcircle,
andusingthemastoolsinthefieldorasfoodwascertainlyacceptable.Anotherimportant
moralconceptisthatofJohnStuartMillandUtilitarianism.Utilitarianismisthephilosophical
conceptthatamoralactisonethatdoesthemostgoodforthemostamountofpeople,orput
anotherway,thatmoralityischoosingthethingthatcausestheleastamountoftotalsuffering.
WhileMillwrotethistodealmostlywithhumanswecouldextendhisargumenttoanimalsas
well.ThequestionforMillmightbeifthesufferingofananimalswaslessimportantthanthe
overallgooditcaused.Thiscouldbeansweredyesornodependingonwhetherornotone
considersanimalssufferingasequaltohumansuffering.
Theintroductionofanimalsintothemoralcirclefirstgainedtractionfromthewordsof
JeremyBentham.Benthamdiscusesmanyreasonswhyanimalsshouldfitintothemoral
circle.OneofthesereasonsisstatedwhenBenthamsaysthattheinterestsofanybeing
affectedbyadecisionmustbetakenintoaccountandtheirinterestsmustbegiventhesame
weightasallothers.Basically,Benthamissayingthatanimalshavethesameintrinsicvalue
ashumans,andthusifhumandecisionsaretoaffectanyanimalsthattheirneedsare

weighedthesameashumans.Thiseffectivelyputanimalsonthesameplayingfieldas
humans.Benthamgoesontodefendthispositiontosaythatevenifanimalsdonthavethe
sameconsciousstatesashumansdoesnotmakethemlessworthyofconsideration.Hesays
thatbabiesandmentallydisabledpeoplemaynothavethesameconsciousstateasadults
buttheystillholdaplaceinthemoralcircle.
AnotherimportantphilosopherinincludinganimalsintothemoralcircleisPeter
Singer.InhismostinfluentialofpaperAllanimalsareequalSingerexplainsmethodically
whyallspeciesofanimalshouldbeincludedinthemoralcircle.Singerarguesthattheidea
thathumansaresuperiortootheranimalsisfalse.Singercomparesthisthinkingtothatof
racists.Hepositsthatjustbecauseonecanrecognizedifferencesbetweenoneindividualor
groupdoesnotmakeonesuperiororinferior.Singersaysthatthisisthecaseforallanimals
aswell.Hesaysthatwhiletherearemajordifferencesbetweenhumansandotheranimalsis
notareasontothinkthathumansaresuperiortootherspecies.Singerattacksthedefense
thatanimalsareneededassustenanceforhumans.Singersaysthatanydesirehumans
haveforeatinganimalscomesfrompreferringthetasteofanimalsandnotthatanimalsare
theonlycarriersofessentialnutrientsforhumanbeings.Hestatesthathavingatastefor
animaldoesnotexcusethefactthatwedonotneedtoeatanimals.Asyoucanseethereare
someverystrongargumentsforputtinganimalsinsidethemoralcircle.
Sowheredofishfitintothisargument?Theyareanimals,soSingerandBentham
wouldundoubtedlysaytheybelonginthecircle.Oneofthemainargumentsforanythingto
belonginthemoralcircleistoavoidcausingsufferingwhetheremotional,physical,ormental.
Sufferingisamajortopicandonethatcouldandhasexhaustedmanyscholarlypapers.
Sufferingisamajorconcernwhendealingwithanycreaturebutmanypeoplehavewondered
dofishfeelpain?NowbeforeIgoonImustrecognizethatthisnarrowsthetopicwehave

beentalkingaboutconsiderably.Whetherornotfishfeelpainmaynotbethedecidingfactor
inwhetherornottoputtheminthemoralcircleornotasthephilosophersabovehave
alreadymadetheircases.Thereasonthismightbeanimportantexaminationisbecause
thereisahugecultureoffisherman,bothforsportandforfood.Commercialfishingaside,
mostfishinginvolvesarod,line,andmostimportantlyahook.Thismakesfishuniqueinthe
sensethatwhileotheranimalsarehuntedandkilledwithalarmingefficiency,fishstillmustbe
caughtandthenkilledanditisdifficultenoughthatithasbecomeamajorsportjusttocatch
fishandthenletthemgo.Thisbringsupaninterestingquestionformanypeople.Iffishcan
feelpain,thenwouldntfishingforsportbecausingfishsufferingfornoreasonotherthan
entertainmentforthefisher?
Therehavebeenmanystudiesdonethatwouldindicatethatfishdoinfactfeelpain.
OnesuchstudythatwasdonewasbyDr.CulumBrown.InthisstudyBrownusedthree
groupsoffishtoseetheeffectsofpaininfish.ThisfirstgroupBrowninjectedabeevenom
intothefishslip,thesecondgotasalinesolutioninjectionintothelipandthelastreceivedno
injection.Brownobservedthatthefishthathadthebeenvenominjectedshowedsignsof
pain,itrubbeditslipsonthesidesoftheglass,showedirritationandmorerapidbreathing,
andevenrockedslightly.Thefishthatreceivedasalinesolutiondidnotreactinsucha
manner,neitherdidthefishthatreceivednoinjection.Thisstudyshowsthatfishdohavea
reactiontostimulusandBrownsaysthisprovesthatfishdoinfactfeelpain.
InresponsetoDr.BrownsstudyDr.J.D.Rosepositsthatfishmayhaveshownwhat
wecouldassumeaspain,butthatdoesnotmeanthattheyfeelpainremotelysimilartohow
humansfeelit.Inhispaper,Rosesaysthatfishlackmanyofthecomponentsthathumansdo
whenfeelingpain.Hesaysthatthecerebralcortexiswherepainsfeelmostpain.Whenpain
isfeltitmovesquicklyfromprimitivepartsofthebraintotheneocortexwhereitthenresides.

Rosesaysthatpainforhumansisusuallyassociatedwithfear,thusachildthatburnstheir
handonthestovewillbeunlikelytodosoagainoutoffear.Thisisnotthecasewhoare
muchmorelikelytorespondtopainwithaggression,showingthatratherthantryingtoavoid
pain,thestimulusismainlyatechniqueforescapingadangeroussituation.Rosealsosays
thatBrownsstudyisincompletebecausewhilethefishshowedsignsofwhatwerelatetoas
pain,itdoesntmeanthatthereisawaytotestiftheyareexperiencingpainormerely
reactingtocertainstimulus.
Asyoucanseethequestionofwhetherfishfeelpainisnotentirelyanswered,for
someitmaynevergetanswered.Whilethisisasmallpartofwhetherornotfishbelonginthe
moralcircleIthinkthisisanimportantquestiontoaskandcouldaffecthowmanypeopleview
fishandifwedoinfactincludethemintothemoralcircle.

WorksCited
Lallanilla,By."DoFishFeelPain?TheDebateContinues."LiveScience.TechMediaNetwork,
2
July2013.Web.9Dec.2014.
<http://www.livescience.com/37921dofishfeelpainfishpain.html>.

Rose,J.D.,Arlinghaus,R.,Cooke,S.J.,Diggles,B.K.,Sawynok,W.,Stevens,E.D.and
Wynne,C.D.L.(2014),Canfishreallyfeelpain?.FishandFisheries,15:97133.
doi:
10.1111/faf.12010

PeterSingerAnimalsAreEqual