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.
