(January 19, 2014 at 1:16 pm)Chuck Wrote: Irrelevant.
Only those consideration for whom could, broadly speaking, plausibly result in tangible future benefit for humanity deserves consideration. Whether they are sentient or capable of reason is a mere crude rule of thumb for those who like to pretend to be moral but doesn't care to take the necessary trouble, and is quite immaterial in any more diligent analysis.
Any system of ethics which steps beyond those bounds - morality can not be justified by anything other than broad but tangible good of those holding the morality - will act to eventually defeat the reason why it might be advisable to be ethical in the first place. They nominally attempt to make the world a moral place but in reality act to gradually weeding out from the world those who would have cared to embrace that system of morality.
what does future benefit mean? I think most people would consider this to mean the reduction of suffering. Animals suffer, therefore they are also worth our consideration.
