Date of this Version
I looked forward to reviewing Mighetto's book so I could set readers straight on the issue of animal rights and environmental ethics. I can quibble with many of her statements. She mentioned that organizations such as Ducks Unlimited were devoted to the protection of a single species. This is clearly false. She, perpetuates the simplified argument of the role of predators in regulating deer numbers in the Kaibab Forest. Most biologists recognize that major policy changes that eliminated grazing on the forest also contributed to, if not explained totally, an eruption of deer on the forest. And in a somewhat maddening fashion, Mighetto uses the term "animal" to exclude humans. To me, this identifies her as a speciesists, a very anthropocentric sect, who try so hard not to be anthropocentric. Speciesists (those who value their own species over others, i.e. humans, but I aver all species are speciesists), as Mighetto rightfully explains, are decried by Singer and his supporters. Singer and his ilk represent some of the most fervent animal rightists, yet the animal rightists create the epitome of speciesism in that they want humans to grant other animals rights. Is this not anthropocentrism?