[Aspects of phenomenal philosophy as starting point for a new animal-human relationship] [Article in German]

Abstract

The legally legitimised relationship to animals mirrors the history of philosophy. The relationship between animals and people in the Middle Ages and in the early Modern Age and the then corresponding jurisdiction allows great insights in this respect. Animals were then considered equal to people. As s consequence, it was possible in the Middle Ages and in the early Modern Age that legal proceedings against animals were undertaken, animals could even be sentenced to death. Enlightenment philosophy changed this by giving legal status exclusively to humans. In modernity animals are not considered to be people. Animals do not act voluntarily and do not have conscious knowledge of possible reactions to their own actions. Because of that, it is not possible to hold them responsible for their actions. The philosophically based premises for guilt are not given and therefore legal proceedings against animals are no longer justified.
The law in respect to animals underwent complete changes as a consequence of philosophical innovation. Legally, animals are now objects and fall under the law of property. The depersonalisation of animals and accordingly the withdrawal of rights that are now exclusively given to people turns animals into basic commodities. The current efforts in philosophy to restore the respect for animals are answered either with the concept of interest or again with a concept that is linked to personality. Both ways turn out to be inadequate when it comes to integrating animals into ethics. Therefore we suggest an ethics that is open to empathy and the "view of the other". The supported ethics is orientated to the phenomenal philosophy of Emmanuel Lévinas and in contrast to conventional types of ethics it represents a higher degree of coherence as the phenomenal ethics is able to integrate phenomena of life as much as possible. Phenomenal ethics gives reasons for a title of life for higher animals and the prohibition of animal testing. The banning of animal testing should be absolute, no exceptions are justified.