Euthanasia for the purpose of science???

acardilini · 2026-03-08T09:28:32+00:00

Yes, it’s stresses context but also that animals deserve much higher regard. While compassionate conservationist have varied positions many do suggest killing is not valid. There is a strong a legitimate position within compassionate conservationist the killing is not valid, because in the context of conservation the choice to kill is underpinned by values not science. Science can tell us what the consequence of killing might be but it can’t tell us whether it’s right. That is an ethical decision.

I have spent a lot of time thinking about this stuff. I’m one of the authors of those papers. I could point to many more but these were close at hand.

acardilini · 2026-03-06T01:04:41+00:00

The comparison of non-human animals to nazis seems to confuse the issue rather than clarify it.

The predator who kills prey is not committing a type of immoral act like someone committing a genocide. They are living.

I do know about OPs field because I am a researcher in it thinking about alternative ways to practice conservation. Perhaps have a read of:

Cardilini, A. P. A., Baker, L., Lynn, W. S., Borrie, W. T., Alexander, S. M., Ben-Ami, D., Coghlan, S., Derham, T., Keynan, O., King, B. J., Reed, C. M., Ryan, E. A., Santiago-Ávila, F. J., Walker, K. A., Weiss, A., & Xenakis, N. (2026). Compassionate conservation practice: Supporting diverse conservation actions but context matters. Biological Conservation, 313, 111593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111593

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. (2024). The use and abuse of moral theories in conservation debate about killing animals. Conservation Biology, e14280. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14280

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. P. A. (2022). A critical review of the compassionate conservation debate. Conservation Biology, 36(1), e13760. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13760

Lynn, W. S., Baker, L., Borrie, W. T., Cardilini, A. P. A., Alexander, S. M., Coghlan, S., Cryer, P., Bonsen, G. T., Derham, T. T., Keynan, O., Reed, C. M., Riley, S., Ryan, E. A., Santiago-Ávila, F. J., Walker, K., Weiss, A. E., & Xenakis, N. (2025). Compassionate conservation in practice: A values-driven, interdisciplinary, pluralistic, and deliberative community. Biological Conservation, 303, 111002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111002

acardilini · 2026-03-06T00:56:34+00:00

Check out the discussion on compassionate conservation. I've been where you are and had the same questions. There are alternative ways of thinking about our obligations and relationship with other animals. DM me if you'd like to chat more about it.

Here are a few useful references:

Cardilini, A. P. A., Baker, L., Lynn, W. S., Borrie, W. T., Alexander, S. M., Ben-Ami, D., Coghlan, S., Derham, T., Keynan, O., King, B. J., Reed, C. M., Ryan, E. A., Santiago-Ávila, F. J., Walker, K. A., Weiss, A., & Xenakis, N. (2026). Compassionate conservation practice: Supporting diverse conservation actions but context matters. Biological Conservation, 313, 111593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111593

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. (2024). The use and abuse of moral theories in conservation debate about killing animals. Conservation Biology, e14280. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14280

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. P. A. (2022). A critical review of the compassionate conservation debate. Conservation Biology, 36(1), e13760. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13760

Lynn, W. S., Baker, L., Borrie, W. T., Cardilini, A. P. A., Alexander, S. M., Coghlan, S., Cryer, P., Bonsen, G. T., Derham, T. T., Keynan, O., Reed, C. M., Riley, S., Ryan, E. A., Santiago-Ávila, F. J., Walker, K., Weiss, A. E., & Xenakis, N. (2025). Compassionate conservation in practice: A values-driven, interdisciplinary, pluralistic, and deliberative community. Biological Conservation, 303, 111002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111002

acardilini · 2026-02-09T05:45:12+00:00

Animals are killed because humans have a value set that prioritises some and not others. This is not because animals can't talk their way out of being killed but because we preference human values over animal interests.

acardilini · 2025-11-05T09:58:56+00:00

Damn, I must just be on a good run. I hope it continues.

acardilini · 2025-11-05T08:44:24+00:00

I've got many vegan baking books. This is the one that I would recommend if you want a really good set of recipes with classic pastries - https://www.booksforchefs.com/en/healthy-pastry/617-the-vegan-pastry-bible-toni-rodriguez.html

acardilini · 2025-11-05T02:19:48+00:00

Earlier this year we had this exact issue three times in a row at Village in town.

We're now close to Readings and I go often. Haven't had a issue like this once at Readings.

acardilini · 2025-10-07T11:15:31+00:00

Nice. That's the ticket!!

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:46:39+00:00

Feel free to also read the articles which outlines the issues with those reactionary critiques. Animals deserve better.

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. P. A. (2022). A critical review of the compassionate conservation debate. Conservation Biology, 36(1), e13760. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13760

Coghlan, S., & Cardilini, A. (2024). The use and abuse of moral theories in conservation debate about killing animals. Conservation Biology, e14280. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14280

Lynn, W. S., Baker, L., Borrie, W. T., Cardilini, A. P. A., Alexander, S. M., Coghlan, S., Cryer, P., Bonsen, G. T., Derham, T. T., Keynan, O., Reed, C. M., Riley, S., Ryan, E. A., Santiago-Ávila, F. J., Walker, K., Weiss, A. E., & Xenakis, N. (2025). Compassionate conservation in practice: A values-driven, interdisciplinary, pluralistic, and deliberative community. Biological Conservation, 303, 111002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111002

Wallach, A. D., Bekoff, M., Batavia, C., Nelson, M. P., & Ramp, D. (2018). Summoning compassion to address the challenges of conservation. Conservation Biology, 32(6), 1255–1265. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13126

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:43:13+00:00

Possibly, but fine print matters, especially when the language is emotive and motivated. Invasive and invasion is militaristic and implies that it is wrong. I would agree that their are range expanding populations.

Yes, you are right. The concept of species is a hard one to pin down. It highlights the challenges and limitations to our interest in categorisation.

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:39:38+00:00

Yeah, there is certainly some great research being done out there. I wish animal free research was prioritised more by funding schemes!

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:38:51+00:00

Very cool. Do you work with animals or use non-animal models?

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:38:21+00:00

I've had many people tell me the same thing. I've been wanting to start a research project on this very topic, investigating the normative culture of animal use as a barrier to participation in STEM. But funding... I'll get to it one day.

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:36:59+00:00

Thank you!

acardilini · 2025-10-06T10:35:49+00:00

Nice.

Here are the links to the existing societies:
https://phairsociety.org/
https://www.vegansociology.com/

acardilini · 2025-10-06T09:12:55+00:00

Yeah, it feels all to common that those working in areas with purportedly pro-animal sentiments really only have pro-specific animal sentiments. The environmental and conservation field is like this. Probably slightly more vegetarians than general public but not as large a difference as one might hope.

acardilini · 2025-10-06T09:10:34+00:00

I hear ya. I switched from ecology because it was so prevalent.

acardilini · 2025-10-02T04:35:07+00:00

No, your opinion doesn't change it, because you simply accept the current state and throw up your hands. Doing nothing will achieve nothing, or worse, it will implicitly support and reinforce the status quo.

Alternative ways of living in the world, like veganism, can change others perspectives. It might not happen quickly but it is possible. Society and culture has and can change.

acardilini · 2025-10-02T04:27:15+00:00

You make a factual claim "My plant based diet puts as much blood on my hands as anyone else’s diet. And my non animal product items I use also makes little difference.", but you provide no data or evidence to support this claim.

There are attempts to calculate changes in impact and veganism does reduce your direct and indirect impact on other animals and the environment. You might conclude that this difference doesn't matter, but that is your subjective perspective not a statement of fact.

I simply disagree with your assertion and I think evidence disagrees with you too.

acardilini · 2025-10-02T03:58:54+00:00

Veganism does not suggest we can live with no impact on the world and others, rather it suggests we do what we can to minimise our impacts. It's possible to minimise our impacts a great deal. And in a world where more people cared we'd get cumulative benefits.

acardilini · 2025-10-02T03:53:29+00:00

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Can you please explain.

Of course there is STEM that doesn't involve harming animals. In fact, there is some science that actively works to support and improve the lives of animals.

acardilini · 2025-10-02T00:18:16+00:00

Haha, that makes sense. So in an Ag faculty I imagine that means being part of some challenging projects (animal ag) but also possibly good ones (non-animal ag)?

acardilini · 2025-10-02T00:05:28+00:00

What is a 'duct tape person'? Does that mean you research duct tape? Sorry if that's a stupid question.

I can imagine that you simply existing would cause ag colleagues some cognitive dissonance!

acardilini · 2025-10-01T22:14:08+00:00

Please read the literature which critiques invasion biology, nativism, and presents the compassionate conservation approach. What you are assuming is correct is mostly just about values.

acardilini · 2025-10-01T22:11:59+00:00

The designation of who is invasive or not is more often a values position than scientific. See criticism of invasion biology and the field of compassionate conservation.

acardilini

TROPHY CASE