Killing for knowledge.

Abstract

I distinguish between four arguments commonly used to justify experimentation on animals (I). After delineating the autonomy of the question of experiments from other topics within animal ethics (II), I examine and reject each of these justifications (III-VI). I then explore two arguments according to which animal-dependent experimentation should continue even if it is immoral (VII). I close with the way in which liberationists' strategic considerations modify the moral conclusions of my analysis.