Tom Regan argues for egalitarian nonhuman animal (hereafter ‘animal’) rights. He
claims that the “wrong isn’t the pain, isn’t the suffering, isn’t the deprivation”
(Regan “The Radical” 31) but rather it is “the system that allows us to view animals
as our resources” (Regan “The Radical” 31). Ascribing inherent value to animals,
where “all possess it equally, and all have an equal right to be treated with respect”
(Regan “The Radical” 36) elevates the moral status of animals to the same level as
humans. Thus, Regan argues against animal industries like commercial agriculture,
biomedical research, and hunting, not because the animals used in these industries
suffer, but because they are not treated in ways that respect their inherent worth.
I argue that what matters morally is not that we use animals as resources, but
whether we are able to maintain equal respect for the animals. Using an indigenous
framework, I argue that hunting is morally permissible for indigenous peoples
because they ascribe equal respect to animals. I appeal to the philosophy of three
indigenous tribes—the Lac du Flambeau, Hopi, and Kluane Nations1—to show
that indigenous hunting practices honor animals’ inherent value. As such, these
indigenous communities (and probably many more) incorporate animals into a
broadly egalitarian account that better aligns with the many ways that humans and
animals interact with each other in the world.
![Plato's Symposium?= Yii::$app->params['organizationName'] ?>](/images/plato.jpg)
