Oh good grief. A book reviewer named Justin Moss, discussing a book called Ethics and Animals, completely misstates the definition of human exceptionalism. From the Metapsychology blog:
In the first chapter, Gruen identifies and analyzes a philosophical view she refers to as “human exceptionalism” — the view that human beings are the only beings deserving of ethical concern, and that humans have no ethical responsibilities to non-human animals.
What garbage. Human exceptionalism actually holds quite the opposite, that animals are of ethical concern and that we—as the only duties-bearing creatures in the known universe—have very serious ethical responsibilities toward animals. Hence, animal welfare laws. Hello?
I don’t know if this particular straw man was erected by the author or the reviewer. But knocking one down takes no talent whatsoever.
Dear Reader,
You have a decision to make: double or nothing.
For this week only, a generous supporter has offered to fully match all new and increased donations to First Things up to $60,000.
In other words, your gift of $50 unlocks $100 for First Things, your gift of $100 unlocks $200, and so on, up to a total of $120,000. But if you don’t give, nothing.
So what will it be, dear reader: double, or nothing?
Make your year-end gift go twice as far for First Things by giving now.
