Djuretik i det vilda

Abstract: From being seen solely as non-sentient property, animals and their emotional capacities now evoke interest from scientists as well as the public. The acceptance of animals as sentient beings has played an important part in the progress of animal ethics, but far from all animals are included in such a view. Wild animals are often disfavoured on account of their wildness and the lack of close connections to human beings. This entails significant consequences for our treatment of and attitudes toward wild animals. The moral differences between wild and human-controlled animals lead to difficulties when facing the issue of wild animal suffering and how humans relate to this problem. A potential human responsibility over wildlife will involve the encounter of wild animals as a part of ecosystems and different processes in nature. The sensitivity to human impact in such entities makes it questionable if human interaction in nature is exclusively adverse to individual wild animals and the purpose they serve in their natural habitat. To elucidate the proper solution to such a moral dilemma, ethicists have put forward arguments based on different ethical values. To navigate through the discrepancy that may arise with different views, applied ethics will provide a tool in order to find a practical solution. This essay has examined the moral issue of wild animal suffering using arguments from the utilitarian theory and the rights view. Additionally, this essay has surveyed the relational and environmental accounts to this ethical dilemma. The literature studied shows that wild animal suffering is a complex question, something that entails that it may be relevant to combine values from different ethical approaches in order to do the right thing. This study may contribute to the debate with an ethical analysis and information regarding the relevant aspects of wild animal suffering.