Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

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.

Dear Reader,

We launched the First Things 2023 Year-End Campaign to keep articles like the one you just read free of charge to everyone.

Measured in dollars and cents, this doesn't make sense. But consider who is able to read First Things: pastors and priests, college students and professors, young professionals and families. Last year, we had more than three million unique readers on

Informing and inspiring these people is why First Things doesn't only think in terms of dollars and cents. And it's why we urgently need your year-end support.

Will you give today?

Make My Gift

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles