63. Should we stop keeping pets? With Angie Pepper and Richard Healey

Send us Fan MailIs it ever morally acceptable to keep pets? While most of us take pet-keeping for granted and think of it as a source of affection, companionship, and care, it is possible to see it very differently. Angie Pepper and Richard Healey argue that pet-keeping is not simply a private choice, but a socio-political institution that raises deep questions about power, control, and harm. In our conversation, I ask them to explain and defend their view that keeping pets is morally impermissible, and to explore what alternatives might look like for our relationships with animals.A short, accessible version of Angie and Richard's paper is here: https://iai.tv/articles/the-unjust-power-dynamics-of-pet-ownership-auid-3518Another of their papers is here:Healey, Richard, and Angie Pepper. "Interspecies justice: agency, self-determination, and assent", Philosophical Studies 178.4 (2021): 1223-1243.Work with an opposing view:Cochrane, Alasdair (2009). Do animals have an interest in liberty? Political Studies, 57(3), 660–679. DOI:  http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00742.xCochrane, Alasdair (2014). Born in chains? The ethics of animal domestication. In Lori Gruen (Ed.), The Ethics of Captivity (156–173). Oxford: Oxford University Press.A general intro to the ethics of pet keeping (also with an opposing view):Palmer, Clare and T. J. Kasperbauer (2022). Companion animals. In Benjamin Hale, Andrew Light and Lydia Lawhon (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Environmental Ethics (343–354). London: Routledge.Ethics Untangled is produced by IDEA, The Ethics Centre at the University of Leeds.As well as the podcast, Ethics Untangled is also the name for the long-form online presence of IDEA.Bluesky: @ethicsuntangled.bluesky.socialInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/idea_leeds/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ideacetlLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/idea-ethics-centre/