Buy new:
-24% USD21.34USD21.34
USD 13.16 delivery Thursday, 6 November
Dispatches from: Amazon Sold by: Amazon
Save with Used - Very Good
USD7.77USD7.77
USD 12.00 delivery 12 - 17 November
Dispatches from: Infinite_Books Sold by: Infinite_Books
Sorry, there was a problem.
There was an error retrieving your Wish Lists. Please try again.Sorry, there was a problem.
List unavailable.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
Why Animals Matter: Animal consciousness, animal welfare, and human well-being Hardcover – International Edition, 29 Mar. 2012
Purchase options and add-ons
She asks important questions such as: are we justified in projecting human emotions on to animals? What can science tell us about their quality of life? She concludes that we need to place less emphasis on the conscious experience of suffering in animals, and more emphasis on the practical importance of animal welfare to human health and human well-being. This requires a long, hard look at some of the cherished ideas we hold about animal emotions, and what we can and cannot know about the conscious experiences of other animals.
- ISBN-100199587825
- ISBN-13978-0199587827
- PublisherOUP Oxford
- Publication date29 Mar. 2012
- LanguageEnglish
- Dimensions14.35 x 2.29 x 22.3 cm
- Print length218 pages
Products related to this item
Product description
Review
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : OUP Oxford
- Publication date : 29 Mar. 2012
- Language : English
- Print length : 218 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0199587825
- ISBN-13 : 978-0199587827
- Item weight : 1.05 kg
- Dimensions : 14.35 x 2.29 x 22.3 cm
- Best Sellers Rank: 1,114,732 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- 429 in Animal Behaviour Science
- 547 in Animal Rights
- 8,701 in Biology (Books)
- Customer reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read book recommendations and more.
Products related to this item
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings, help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyses reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonTop reviews from United Kingdom
There was a problem filtering reviews. Please reload the page.
- Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 23 April 2012Format: HardcoverVerified PurchaseI was so excited to see Dawkins' book that I had it shipped from overseas (not available in the US until June '12). Absolutely worth the extra shipping! A very interesting perspective and I'm recommending it for my students this coming year.
- Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 30 November 2014Format: HardcoverVerified Purchasecos animals DO matter!
- Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 22 November 2016Format: Hardcoverfrom the phrases on the front cover of the book I quickly formed an opinion of what what I thought this book would be about: the reasons animals matter, but actually reading the book there aren't that many reasons mentioned. Around the middle of the book I quickly found myself becoming uninterested and bored after roughly 30 pages on the subject of consciousness, there seemed to be a lot of back and forth writing and repetition of the same point- that we can't measure it and we don't really know what it is, the chapters really began to drag at the halfway point. For a more interesting/ engaging animal read I recommend 'some we love, some we hate, some we eat' by Hal H.
Top reviews from other countries
Benjamin M KillgoreReviewed in the United States on 30 November 20145.0 out of 5 stars This is the "agnostic" answer for why animal rights matter ...
This is the "agnostic" answer for why animal rights matter. It takes what M.S. Dawkins calls the "big problem" of animal studies/rights out of the equation so that we can focus on the kinds of arguments that will be effective for everyone, not just those of us who believe nonhuman animals suffer just as we do. These are the kinds of arguments (we need more of them) that will actually change the mind of those on the fence and the minds of those we now consider opponents.
RJ ConnReviewed in the United States on 6 October 20214.0 out of 5 stars worthwhile read on important topic
This book was required reading for my college course. It proved to be a valuable 'conversation starter' to foster discussions both inside and out of class.
I thought it proved to be an easy read and I would recommend it to be added into an animal welfare related library. It is thought provoking and well written and can lead to some interesting debates on consciousness in other creatures.
I would not recommend this text as a stand alone class material, and I struggle to imagine giving it as a gift outside of a school. Perhaps to an animal shelter for an addition to their library?
rama ganesanReviewed in the United States on 18 November 20142.0 out of 5 stars Is "Militant Agnosticism" the best way to advance animal welfare?
Dr. Dawkins offers a strictly `scientific' and non-anthropomorphic approach to studying animals. Such explanations for animal behavior are basically mechanistic, where animal minds are machines with one node connecting to another, without recourse to anything resembling subjectivity. According to these types of explanations, we do not need to evoke consciousness to explain animal behavior. Even when animal behavior looks conscious, intentional and purposive, scientists can think up explanations that do not invoke consciousness (these are referred to as `killjoy' explanations). The `hard problem' of consciousness, explaining subjective experience, is deferred indefinitely, to some future scientific endeavor.
The interesting point is that Dr. Dawkins says that the scientific approach is the best way to advance animal welfare. But it is hard to understand why this should be. How does treating animals essentially as machines justify a greater emphasis on animal welfare? It is clear that animals have needs, like food, water and shelter, and fulfilling those needs is directly beneficial to humans who want to use animals for food, clothing, entertainment, or scientific testing. But animals also have `wants' and these wants are discoverable through the science of animal behavior, using choice tests and other methods of operant conditioning. But if our interpretations of their behavior are all mechanistic, and there is no conscious awareness, then why would we care for their wants? After all there is no ONE there to suffer.
Dr. Dawkins' argument is that by leaving consciousness out of animal welfare and by adopting a strictly scientific approach, we will leave the possibility of consciousness open for many more animals. "Rather than claiming to have solved the hard problem of consciousness, it is much, much better for animals if we remain skeptical and agnostic. Militantly agnostic if necessary, because this keeps alive the possibility that a large number of species have some sort of conscious experiences, rather than ruling them out because they do not fit a particular theory of what consciousness is or appear to fall foul of a `killjoy' explanation. For all we know, many animals, not just the clever ones and not just the overtly emotional ones, also have conscious experiences. A consciousness-sceptic would not even rule it out for invertebrates such as crabs and prawns."
Much as I love the science of animal behavior and animal cognition, I am skeptical of whether the militant agnosticism will help us care about animal welfare. Rather, it might be morality or conscience that will make us care about animal welfare, and dare I say it, their rights. Even if we believed that animals were conscious, it doesn't mean we will care about their welfare.
In fact, this book coincides with an event where scientists issued by decree that non-humans are indeed `conscious.' In July 2012, several eminent neuroscientists signed the Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, which specifically draws parallels between brains structures in humans and animals, particularly those that subserve consciousness and emotion. Although Dr. Dawkins does critique the neural correlates model for consciousness she does not specifically anticipate the declaration, which seems to be an oversight. In any case, having the scientific Declaration on Consciousness in animals hasn't changed anything thus far; we still treat non-humans pretty the same as we did before.
People who might argue for animal welfare on `unscientific' grounds maybe ridiculed as `welfairies.' But we also know that scientists who insist on bending over backwards for killjoy explanations for animal behaviors that are obviously parallel to conscious, human behaviors can also be ridiculed. The author herself refers to this on the final page: "The current fashion for science-bashing and ridiculing scientists for pointing out how hard it is to study consciousness is not helping the development of a scientifically based study of animal welfare." I wonder if the motivation for writing this book was just that - defending scientists who are trained to apply Occam's razor, and end up sounding ridiculous, at least sometimes, because they miss the obvious, that the animals that we exploit are indeed conscious.
Disclosure: Dr. Dawkins was my professor for Animal Behavior. I think she gave me an 'A.'
Mick McAllisterReviewed in the United States on 6 June 20144.0 out of 5 stars Don't Listen to Bekoff
Mark Bekoff blasted this book (which actually contains a swipe at his "anthropomorphism"), notably in a Psychology Today review and his own collection of his Psychology Today columns. Hosswaddle. Dawkins is a committed advocate to animal welfare, with a strongly utilitarian slant that drew Bekoff's sentimental ire. Her book is a thoughtful attempt to reason with the common view that animals do not "matter," especially if we are hungry. She's not, like Bekoff, a prophet bellowing while Salome dances. Like Bernie Rollin and Temple Grandin, Dawkins is doing something about animal welfare rather than just castigating the unbeliever.
Marc BekoffReviewed in the United States on 7 May 20121.0 out of 5 stars Dawkins' dangerous idea: Animals are conscious beings and science does count
This book summarily ignores or denies the existence of excellent scientific data supporting the not so surprising claim that other animals are indeed conscious beings. I've published an extensive review in an essay for Psychology Today.
Claims that "being anthropomorphic" is anti-science and demeaning comments about the excellent research of some of Professor Dawkins' esteemed colleagues are so far off it's almost laughable, but it really isn't at all. I fear that this book may actually be used by some people to justify continued animal use and abuse because of the spurious conclusions Professor Dawkins draws by rejecting what we really do know about animal consciousness. Animals are conscious beings and good science matters very much. To continue to deny that other animals are conscious flies in the face of what we know about them and also could be used to justify harming them. I like to call this ill-founded argument "Dawkins' Dangerous Idea".



