The Speciesism of Leaving Nature Alone and the Theoretical Case for “Wildlife Anti-Natalism”

Discriminating against individuals based on their species membership is no more justified than discriminating against individuals based on their race or gender. In other words, speciesism must be rejected. From this simple starting point, the indefensibility of refusing to help non-human beings in nature follows quite directly. More

Sentient beings should be granted moral consideration based on their sentience and nothing else. Fortunately, most of us now seem to realize this when it comes to humans: the sentience of human individuals alone implies that they should be granted full moral consideration. Neither their intelligence, gender nor race is relevant. What we have yet to acknowledge, however, is that there is no justification for not extending this insight to non-human beings too. Discriminating against individuals based on their species membership is no more justified than discriminating against individuals based on their race or gender. In other words, speciesism must be rejected. From this simple starting point – that speciesism is indefensible – the indefensibility of refusing to help non-human beings in nature follows quite directly, as such a refusal is transparently speciesist.