Citizenship goes to the dogs

Abstract

The conclusion I defend is that "domestic animals" have a moral claim to what I refer to as "basic citizenship rights," and that they do so for the same reason that "non-autonomous humans" do. I define each of these key terms. The bulk of this dissertation is structured around the following formal argument, which I refer to as the Political AMC, on account of its strategy being borrowed from the so-called Argument from Marginal Cases, or AMC: (P1) Non-rationally autonomous humans have an undefeated moral claim to basic citizenship rights. (P2) If non-rationally autonomous humans have an undefeated moral claim to basic citizenship rights, then possessing vulnerability and no decisive defeaters is a sufficient condition for having an undefeated claim to basic citizenship rights. (C1) Possessing vulnerability and no decisive defeaters is a sufficient condition for having a claim to basic citizenship rights. (P3) Domestic animals possess vulnerability and no decisive defeaters. (C2) Domestic animals have an undefeated claim to basic citizenship rights. The defense offered for Premise 2 is abductive--an inference to the best explanation-- and treated accordingly