A New Argument for Animalism
Blatti (Stephan)
Source: Analysis Vol 72, Number 4, October 2012, pp. 685–690
Paper - Abstract

Paper SummaryNotes Citing this PaperText Colour-Conventions

Author's Abstract

  1. The theory of personal identity known as "animalism1" asserts that we are human organisms — that each of us is an instance of the Homo sapiens species.
  2. The standard argument for this view is known as the "thinking animal argument2".
  3. In this brief paper, I offer a second argument for animalism: "animal ancestors argument3".
  4. This argument illustrates how the case for animalism can be seen to piggy-back on the credibility of evolutionary theory.
  5. Two related objections are considered and answered.

Author's Introduction4
  1. Though Aristotelian in spirit, the view known as animalism is a relative latecomer to the debate over personal identity, having been defended only within the past 25 years or so.
  2. Its advocates make the following straightforward claim: we are animals. According to the intended reading of this claim, the ‘are’ reflects the ‘is’ of numerical identity (not the ‘is’ of non-identical constitution); the ‘we’ is intended to pick out you, me and others of our kind; and ‘human animals’ is meant to refer to biological organisms of the Homo sapiens species.
  3. According to animalism’s most sophisticated rival, neo-Lockean constitutionalism5, we persons are non-identically constituted by human animals, rather like the way statues are said to be constituted by the lumps of matter with which they coincide.


See Link.

In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 3: Footnote 4:

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2018
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)

© Theo Todman, June 2007 - February 2018. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page