A recent essay at Aeon Magazine raised the important question of how far the circle of moral concern will expand in the years ahead. That circle has expanded over two centuries in the West from propertied Christian white men to include women, as well as people of all races, religions, classes and increasingly sexual orientations. But though we may largely renounce discrimination among religions, genders, class, and race, we still takes species differences quite seriously, as the menu of almost any restaurant immediately reveals. Are we morally wrong to do so?

As a moral anti-realist—someone who believes there are no objective facts about what is morally right and wrong—I think there is no way to adjudicate among our fundamental moral attitudes, once we clear up any disagreements about the non-moral facts.   We can agree that non-human animals are sentient, and that they suffer, and still “reasonably” believe that their suffering is justifiable or defensible, given our other moral attitudes.

Read more at Aeon Ideas