Uniwersyteckie Czasopisma NaukoweFilozoficznoprawna analiza argumentu z hipokryzji w sporze o japońskie wielorybnictwo
Abstrakt
This article analyses the hypocrisy argument advanced in disputes about international whaling. This argument suggests that societies condemning Japanese whaling, while simultaneously accepting industrial animal farming, are guilty of moral inconsistency. This article discusses the assumption that the moral status of whales and farm animals is identical. I use Mary Anne Warren’s multi-criteria conception of moral status, systematically comparing whales and pigs according to seven criteria: respect for life, the anti-cruelty principle, moral agency, human rights, ecological significance, interspecies relationships, and transitivity of respect. My analysis reveals significant differences in the moral status of both species. Whales demonstrate advanced cognitive abilities, play a crucial ecological role, and enjoy special cultural status, making the moral weight of killing a whale greater than that of killing a pig. These findings undermine the hypocrisy argument, demonstrating that condemning whaling while accepting pig farming represents a consistent application of moral theory rather than hypocrisy. The article offers intellectual tools for conducting debates about whaling free from accusations of cultural imperialism.
Downloads
Bibliografia
Akamine J., Multiplicities of Japanese Whaling: A Case Study of Bair d’s-Beaked Whaling and its Foodways in Chiba Prefecture, Eastern Japan, „RCC Perspectives: Transformations in Environment and Society” 2019, no. 6: New Histories of Pacific Whaling. Revised Edition, eds. R.T. Jones, A. Wanhalla. Arch J., Whale Meat in Early Postwar Japan: Natural Resources and Food Culture, „Environmental History” 2016, vol. 21, no. 3.
Bearzi G., Kerem D., Furey N.B., Pitman R.L., Rendell L., Reeves R.R., Whale and dolphin behavioural responses to dead conspecifi cs, „Zoology” 2018, vol. 128.
Bekoff M., Pierce J., Dzika sprawiedliwość. Moralne życie zwierząt, tłum. S. Szymański, Copernicus Center Press, Kraków 2018.
Brosnan S.F., de Waal F.B.M., Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay, „Nature” 2003, vol. 425.
Burgess C., „Killing the Practice of Whale Hunting is the same as Killing the Japanese People”: Identity, National Pride, and Nationalism in Japan’s Resistance to International Pressure to Curb Whaling, „Asia-Pacifi c Journal / Japan Focus” 2016, vol. 14, no. 8.
Cabaj O., Łachacz O., Orzeczenie Międzynarodowego Trybunału Sprawiedliwości w sprawie Australia przeciwko Japonii dotyczące połowu wielorybów z 2014 r. (tzw. Whaling) – głos międzynarodowego wymiaru sprawiedliwości w międzynarodowym dyskursie na temat ochrony wielorybów, „Studia Prawnoustrojowe” 2017, nr 38.
Casal P., Whaling, Bullfi ghting, and the Conditional Value of Tradition, „Res Publica” 2021, vol. 27, no. 3.
Cohen G.A., Casting the fi rst stone: Who can and who can’t condemn the terrorist, „Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement” 2006, vol. 58.
Kalland A., Super whale: The use of myths and symbols in environmentalism [w:] 11 Essays on Whales and Man, ed. G. Blichfeldt, 2nd ed., High North Alliance, Reinei, Lofoten 1994.
Kojima C., Japan’s Decision to Withdraw from the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, „Asia-Pacifi c Journal of Ocean Law and Policy” 2019, vol. 4, no. 1.
Kolmaš M., International pressure and Japanese withdrawal from the International Whaling Commission: when shaming fails, „Australian Journal of International Affairs” 2021, vol. 75, no. 1.
Kuwahara S., Shimbun S., Don’t Let the Anti-Whaling Zealots Impose Their Hypocrisy on Japan, 20.08.2019, https://japan-forward.com/dont-let-the-anti-whaling-zealots-impose-their-hypocrisy-on-japan/ (dostęp: 15.06.2025).
LeDoux J.E., Historia naszej świadomości. Jak po czterech miliardach lat ewolucji powstał świadomy mózg, tłum. A. Binder, M. Binder, il. C. da Silva Sorrentino, Copernicus Center Press, Kraków 2020.
Marino L., Connor R.C., Fordyce R.E., Herman L.M., Hof P.R., Lefebvre L., Lusseau D., McCowan B., Nimchinsky E.A., Pack A.A., Rendell L., Reidenberg J.S., Reiss D., Uhen M.D., Gucht Van der E., Whitehead H., Cetaceans Have Complex Brains for Complex Cognition, „PLoS Biology” 2007, vol. 5, no. 5.
Pietrzykowski T., Prawo ochrony zwierząt. Pojęcia, zasady, dylematy, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2022.
Probucka D., Filozofi czne podstawy idei praw zwierząt, Towarzystwo Autorów i Wydawców Prac Naukowych „Universitas”, Kraków 2013.
Rebmann S.K., Japanese Whaling and the International Community: Enforcing the International Court of Justice and Halting NEWREP-A, „Arizona Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies” 2016, vol. 5.
Roman J., Estes J.A., Morissette L., Smith C., Costa D., McCarthy J., Nation J.B., Nicol S., Pershing A., Smetacek V., Whales as marine ecosystem engineers, „Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment” 2014, vol. 12, no. 7.
Rots A.P., Whales of hope: Whaling heritage, tourism, and community belonging in twenty-fi rst-century Japan, „Contemporary Japan” 2025.
Warren M.A., Status moralny. Obowiązki wobec osób i innych istot żywych, tłum. S. Tokariew, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2019.
Yiallourides C., Understanding Japan’s Resumption of Commercial Whaling under International Law [w:] The Environmental Rule of Law for Oceans: Designing Legal Solutions, eds. F.M. Platjouw, A. Pozdnakova, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2023.
Źródła prawa
Konwencja Narodów Zjednoczonych o prawie morza, sporządzona w Montego Bay dnia 10 grudnia 1982 r. (Dz. U. z 2002 r. Nr 59, poz. 543).
Międzynarodowa Konwencja o uregulowaniu połowów wielorybów, sporządzona w Waszyngtonie dnia 2 grudnia 1946 r. (Dz. U. z 2009 r. Nr 143, poz. 1165).
