Philosophy Atlas

How Thinkers Disagree
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Arguments and Positions

Argument from Marginal Cases

Ethics

The argument from marginal cases is used in animal ethics to challenge the assumption that all and only human beings possess full moral status. It observes that whatever characteristic is proposed as the ground of that status, such as rationality, self-awareness or language use, is lacking in certain human beings sometimes called marginal cases, including infants, the severely cognitively disabled and people in a permanent coma, even though these humans are still granted moral status. Since some non-human animals meet these same criteria at least as well as marginal-case humans do, the argument concludes that consistency requires either extending comparable moral status to those animals or withdrawing it from the marginal-case humans, a dilemma pressed by philosophers such as Peter Singer against any sharp species-based line drawn around moral status.

Facts
Origin Year
270 1
Sourced to the subject's own accountApproximate 3rd-century CE dating of Porphyrys treatise; the argument saw a separate modern revival in the 1970s by writers including Peter Singer and James Rachels, per the same source.
Classification
Position KindSourced to the subject's own account
Argument For 1
Position KindSourced to the subject's own account
Argument Against 1
Connections

Associated With

Source Argument from Marginal Cases (Wikipedia)

In Branch

Source Argument from Marginal Cases (Wikipedia)
Sources
1. Argument from Marginal Cases (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia
  • Argument from marginal cases (Wikipedia), on Porphyry
    Daniel Dombrowski writes that the argument can be traced to Porphyrys third-century treatise On Abstinence from Eating Animals.
  • Lead
    The argument from marginal cases (also known as the argument from species overlap) is a philosophical argument within animal rights theory regarding the moral status of non-human animals.
  • Argument from marginal cases (Wikipedia), introduction
    The argument from marginal cases (also known as the argument from species overlap) is a philosophical argument within animal rights theory regarding the moral status of non-human animals.
  • Associated With: Peter Singer, Article text
    Peter Singer phrases it this way:
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

Choose a year to see this entry's facts and connections as the atlas records them at that moment: what it held then, what it held instead, and what it had not yet adopted. Choose Present for the current record.