bernard rollin | Colorado State University (original) (raw)
Papers by bernard rollin
New Ideas in Psychology, 1986
New Ideas in Psychology, 2000
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1980
Amicus curiae brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project's efforts to secure recognition of ... more Amicus curiae brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project's efforts to secure recognition of legal personhood and rights for two chimpanzees.
Philosophers Offer Support For Chimpanzee Rights Cases As Nonhuman Rights Project Seeks To Appeal To New York’s Highest Court
– Experts in animal ethics, animal political theory, the philosophy of animal cognition and behavior, and the philosophy of biology urge the Court of Appeals to recognize chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko as persons –
Feb. 26, 2018—New York, NY—After the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) filed a motion for permission to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals in the cases of captive chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko, a group of prominent philosophers submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the NhRP’s efforts to secure recognition of their clients’ legal personhood and rights.
The NhRP argues in its Memorandum of Law, filed on Friday, that the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department’s June 2017 ruling requires review by the state’s highest court, not only because it conflicts with New York’s common law habeas corpus statute and previous rulings of the Court of Appeals, the First Department, and other Appellate Departments on issues pertaining to common law personhood and habeas corpus relief, but also “based on the novelty, difficulty, importance, and effect of the legal and public policy issues raised.”
Engaging directly with a core issue raised by the NhRP’s appeal—the question of who is a “person” capable of possessing any legal rights—the philosophers’ brief maintains that the First Department’s ruling “uses a number of incompatible conceptions of person which, when properly understood, are either philosophically inadequate or in fact compatible with Kiko and Tommy’s personhood.” The philosophers who authored the brief are:
Kristin Andrews (York University)
Gary Comstock (North Carolina State University)
G.K.D. Crozier (Laurentian University)
Sue Donaldson (Queen’s University)
Andrew Fenton (Dalhousie University)
Tyler M. John (Rutgers University)
L. Syd M Johnson (Michigan Technological University)
Robert C. Jones (California State University, Chico)
Will Kymlicka (Queen’s University)
Letitia Meynell (Dalhousie University)
Nathan Nobis (Morehouse College)
David Peña-Guzmán (California State University, San Francisco)
James Rocha (California State University, Fresno)
Bernard Rollin (Colorado State)
Jeffrey Sebo (New York University)
Adam Shriver (University of British Columbia)
Rebecca L. Walker (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
“We submit this brief in our shared interest in ensuring a more just co-existence with other animals who live in our communities,” they write. “We strongly urge this Court, in keeping with the best philosophical standards of rational judgment and ethical standards of justice, to recognize that, as nonhuman persons, Kiko and Tommy should be granted a writ of habeas corpus and their detainers should have the burden of showing the lawful justification of their current confinement.”
Tommy is a male chimpanzee whom the NhRP discovered living alone in a cage in a shed on a used trailer lot along Route 30 in Gloversville, New York.
Kiko is a male chimpanzee, who, to the best of the NhRP’s knowledge, is held in captivity in a cage in a cement storefront attached to a home in a residential area in Niagara Falls, New York.
The NhRP has been fighting since 2013 to free them to Save the Chimps sanctuary, where they can live with other chimpanzees in a more natural environment where their fundamental right to bodily liberty will be respected.
The NhRP expects the Court to rule on its motion for permission to appeal in 6-8 weeks.
Archiv Fur Geschichte Der Philosophie, 1969
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 00948705 1996 9714527, Jan 19, 2012
Javma J Am Vet Med Assoc, 2008
Science & Education, 2014
ABSTRACT Uncertainty about ethics has been a major factor in societal rejection of biotechnology.... more ABSTRACT Uncertainty about ethics has been a major factor in societal rejection of biotechnology. Six factors help create a societal “perfect storm” regarding ethics and biotechnology: Social demand for ethical discussion; societal scientific illiteracy; poor social understanding of ethics; a “Gresham’s Law for Ethics;” Scientific Ideology; vested interests dominating ethical discussion. How this can be remedied is discussed.
Biomedical Ethics Reviews, 1990, 1991
... Animal Research 215 A moment's reflection reveals that the ideological view of science a... more ... Animal Research 215 A moment's reflection reveals that the ideological view of science as value-free in general, or ethics-free in particular, must be wrong ... Insofar as we forebear from doing biomedical research on unwanted children or political prisoners, even though ...
The Well-Being of Farm Animals, 2004
Page 1. I Theoretical Framework Page 2. 3 1 The Ethical Imperative to Control Pain and Suffering ... more Page 1. I Theoretical Framework Page 2. 3 1 The Ethical Imperative to Control Pain and Suffering in Farm Animals Bernard E. Rollin I It is easy to forget that the concept expressed in the term profession extends over many more ...
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Aug 1, 2009
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, 2008
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Feb 1, 2006
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Dec 1, 2005
New Ideas in Psychology, 1986
New Ideas in Psychology, 2000
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1980
Amicus curiae brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project's efforts to secure recognition of ... more Amicus curiae brief in support of the Nonhuman Rights Project's efforts to secure recognition of legal personhood and rights for two chimpanzees.
Philosophers Offer Support For Chimpanzee Rights Cases As Nonhuman Rights Project Seeks To Appeal To New York’s Highest Court
– Experts in animal ethics, animal political theory, the philosophy of animal cognition and behavior, and the philosophy of biology urge the Court of Appeals to recognize chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko as persons –
Feb. 26, 2018—New York, NY—After the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) filed a motion for permission to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals in the cases of captive chimpanzees Tommy and Kiko, a group of prominent philosophers submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the NhRP’s efforts to secure recognition of their clients’ legal personhood and rights.
The NhRP argues in its Memorandum of Law, filed on Friday, that the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department’s June 2017 ruling requires review by the state’s highest court, not only because it conflicts with New York’s common law habeas corpus statute and previous rulings of the Court of Appeals, the First Department, and other Appellate Departments on issues pertaining to common law personhood and habeas corpus relief, but also “based on the novelty, difficulty, importance, and effect of the legal and public policy issues raised.”
Engaging directly with a core issue raised by the NhRP’s appeal—the question of who is a “person” capable of possessing any legal rights—the philosophers’ brief maintains that the First Department’s ruling “uses a number of incompatible conceptions of person which, when properly understood, are either philosophically inadequate or in fact compatible with Kiko and Tommy’s personhood.” The philosophers who authored the brief are:
Kristin Andrews (York University)
Gary Comstock (North Carolina State University)
G.K.D. Crozier (Laurentian University)
Sue Donaldson (Queen’s University)
Andrew Fenton (Dalhousie University)
Tyler M. John (Rutgers University)
L. Syd M Johnson (Michigan Technological University)
Robert C. Jones (California State University, Chico)
Will Kymlicka (Queen’s University)
Letitia Meynell (Dalhousie University)
Nathan Nobis (Morehouse College)
David Peña-Guzmán (California State University, San Francisco)
James Rocha (California State University, Fresno)
Bernard Rollin (Colorado State)
Jeffrey Sebo (New York University)
Adam Shriver (University of British Columbia)
Rebecca L. Walker (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
“We submit this brief in our shared interest in ensuring a more just co-existence with other animals who live in our communities,” they write. “We strongly urge this Court, in keeping with the best philosophical standards of rational judgment and ethical standards of justice, to recognize that, as nonhuman persons, Kiko and Tommy should be granted a writ of habeas corpus and their detainers should have the burden of showing the lawful justification of their current confinement.”
Tommy is a male chimpanzee whom the NhRP discovered living alone in a cage in a shed on a used trailer lot along Route 30 in Gloversville, New York.
Kiko is a male chimpanzee, who, to the best of the NhRP’s knowledge, is held in captivity in a cage in a cement storefront attached to a home in a residential area in Niagara Falls, New York.
The NhRP has been fighting since 2013 to free them to Save the Chimps sanctuary, where they can live with other chimpanzees in a more natural environment where their fundamental right to bodily liberty will be respected.
The NhRP expects the Court to rule on its motion for permission to appeal in 6-8 weeks.
Archiv Fur Geschichte Der Philosophie, 1969
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 00948705 1996 9714527, Jan 19, 2012
Javma J Am Vet Med Assoc, 2008
Science & Education, 2014
ABSTRACT Uncertainty about ethics has been a major factor in societal rejection of biotechnology.... more ABSTRACT Uncertainty about ethics has been a major factor in societal rejection of biotechnology. Six factors help create a societal “perfect storm” regarding ethics and biotechnology: Social demand for ethical discussion; societal scientific illiteracy; poor social understanding of ethics; a “Gresham’s Law for Ethics;” Scientific Ideology; vested interests dominating ethical discussion. How this can be remedied is discussed.
Biomedical Ethics Reviews, 1990, 1991
... Animal Research 215 A moment's reflection reveals that the ideological view of science a... more ... Animal Research 215 A moment's reflection reveals that the ideological view of science as value-free in general, or ethics-free in particular, must be wrong ... Insofar as we forebear from doing biomedical research on unwanted children or political prisoners, even though ...
The Well-Being of Farm Animals, 2004
Page 1. I Theoretical Framework Page 2. 3 1 The Ethical Imperative to Control Pain and Suffering ... more Page 1. I Theoretical Framework Page 2. 3 1 The Ethical Imperative to Control Pain and Suffering in Farm Animals Bernard E. Rollin I It is easy to forget that the concept expressed in the term profession extends over many more ...
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Aug 1, 2009
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, 2008
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Feb 1, 2006
The Canadian Veterinary Journal La Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, Dec 1, 2005