Talk:Speciesism

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Speciesism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

Animal rights Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Effective Altruism B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Effective Altruism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relevant to effective altruism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Effective AltruismWikipedia:WikiProject Effective AltruismTemplate:WikiProject Effective AltruismEffective Altruism articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Veganism and Vegetarianism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Swartz, Brian; Mishler, Brent D., eds. (2022). Speciesism in Biology and Culture: How Human Exceptionalism is Pushing Planetary Boundaries (PDF). Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-99031-2. ISBN 978-3-030-99031-2.

Wikipedia Ambassador Program assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Mount Allison University supported by Canada Education Program and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}} on 14:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Harleensarai688 (article contribs).

The article does not mention vermin

The article talks about philosophical positions and species that are more appreciated by humans. It does not mention rats, mice, roaches, fleas, lice, ticks, weevils, corn borers, tapeworms, etc. These species are not addressed and defended in this article. Fun to speculate why these species are not defended.Pete unseth (talk) 01:37, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The very purpose of defining speciesism is to explain the human exploitation of non-human animals. Thus, self-defense or other defensive acts (such as killing a fatally attacking lion or snake or even a human) doesn't involve speciesism. Killing vermin are primarily considered acts of defense, although animal rights activists oppose these as well. Nevertheless, speciesism applies when any of these animals (rats, mice, etc.) are exploited by humans for their body parts, scientific research, and so forth, the reason why research involving these animals are opposed. And the article very much talks about animal research. Rasnaboy (talk) 06:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mammals have higher status than other animals?

The article still needs to wrestle with definition(s) of speciesism. It mentions the idea of some animal species being treated differently than others. However, the article is basically concerned with humans vs. other species. But there are huge differences in the way humans value various species, which is clearly "speciesism". Mammals are generally thought of as worthy of more value than insects. And a very small set of often-domesticated species are widely thought of as worthy of more value than other mammals. These are also examples of speciesism. The definition(s) and example should reflect this more, not merely human vs. non human. Treating some animals as more worthy than others absolutely undermines the whole concept of speciesism. Pete unseth (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article has a few problems. It tends to assert that "scholars" say X, and per WP:RS A statement that all or most scientists or scholars hold a certain view requires reliable sourcing that directly says that all or most scientists or scholars hold that view. Though it's not policy, it is a guideline. I couldn't check every source in this article to see if that's the case, but I have a feeling it's not based on what I have read. It also makes claims without properly attributing them, such as using PETA as a source. While there's nothing wrong with that, it's undeniable that PETA is a heavily opinionated and biased source, and when used, it should be mentioned that the preceding statement may have been made by PETA. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 12:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Ma'arri in History Section

To create a more neutral point of view the History section would benefit from a reference to Abū Al-Ma'arri, see: Al-Ma'arri#Unjust exploitation of animals. (sdsds - talk) 03:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]