I would like to issue an absolute and unequivocal retraction of the allegations that I made earlier in the history of this blog to the effect that Professor Gary L. Francione in any way plagiarized the ideas of Professor Robert Garner. To help clarify, the matter was over the insight that animal welfarism’s restriction against “unnecessary suffering” can logically lead to abolishing speciesist practices (for a discussion of this idea in a completely different context, I refer the interested reader to “Francione on Unnecessary Suffering,” i.e., the blog entry for July 28, 2007). Now there are always common ideas that can be found amongst any thinkers and the two professors have very different ways of thinking. Francione sent me his thoughts on the matter, which I found to be informative. I add that I should have sought out his thoughts on this to begin with, and I do sincerely regret this error of omission. Francione’s own opinion, if I may paraphrase my understanding of the ideas in question, is that Garner’s argument is part of his general stance as an “animal welfarist.” Francione himself argues against such animal welfarism, and so the fabric of the ideas in question is unmistakably distinct and different. (To see my own reflection of the animal welfarism vs. anti-animal-welfarism debate, and of Francione's and Garner's polarized views, please see generally Sztybel, "Animal Rights Law: Fundamentalism versus Pragmatism," Journal for Critical Animal Studies V (1) (2007): 1-35.) To sum up briefly, my finding is that the case in question does not constitute a case of “intellectual theft.” I was in error about this matter.
I would also at this time like to issue an unmitigated apology to Professor Francione and also to anyone else who might suffered due to my rash and regrettable actions. Let none of what I wrote in the deleted blog entry in question cause anyone to so much as seek to bring into question Professor Francione’s academic integrity and honesty.
FURTHER READING ON ANIMAL RIGHTS INCREMENTALISM
A Selection of Related Articles
Sztybel, David. "Animal Rights Law: Fundamentalism versus Pragmatism". Journal for Critical Animal Studies 5 (1) (2007): 1-37.
Short version of "Animal Rights Law".
Sztybel, David. "Incrementalist Animal Law: Welcome to the Real World".
Sztybel, David. "Sztybelian Pragmatism versus Francionist Pseudo-Pragmatism".
A Selection of Related Blog Entries
Anti-Cruelty Laws and Non-Violent Approximation
Use Not Treatment: Francione’s Cracked Nutshell
Francione Flees Debate with Me Again, Runs into the “Animal Jury”
The False Dilemma: Veganizing versus Legalizing
Veganism as a Baseline for Animal Rights: Two Different Senses
Francione's Three Feeble Critiques of My Views
Startling Decline in Meat Consumption Proves Francionists Are Wrong Once Again!
The Greatness of the Great Ape Project under Attack!
Francione Totally Misinterprets Singer
Francione's Animal Rights Theory
Francione on Unnecessary Suffering
Sztybel versus Francione on Animals' Property Status
No comments:
Post a Comment