Brute Science investigates whether biomedical research using animals is, in fact, scientifically justified. Hugh LaFollette and Niall Shanks examine the issues in scientific terms using the models that scientists themselves use. They argue that we need to reassess our use of animals and, indeed, rethink the standard positions in the debate.

Animal experimentation is one of the most controversial areas of debate on animal rights. Biomedical research is at the hard edge of these debates: it throws up fundamental questions of moral value - of whether human life is more important than that of animals. Much experimentation is defended by its apparent success in terms of increasing medical knowledge. This study investigates whether biomedical research using animals is, in fact, scientifically justified. The authors show that in scientific terms - using the models that scientists themselves use - these claims are exaggerated, or even false. They argue that we need to reassess our use of animals and, indeed, rethink the standard positions in the debate. Their analysis reveals why research using animals might be a source of hypotheses about human biomedical phenomena, yet would never prove or establish anything about this phenomena.

The fourth edition of Ethics in Practice offers an impressive collection of 70 new, revised, and classic essays covering 13 key ethical issues. Essays integrate ethical theory and the discussion of practical moral problems into a text that is ideal for introductory and applied ethics courses. * A fully updated and revised edition of this authoritative anthology of classic and contemporary essays covering a wide range of ethical and moral issues * Integrates ethical theory with discussions of practical moral problems, and includes three essays on theory written specifically for this volume * Nearly half of the essays are written or revised exclusively for this anthology, which now also features eleven essays new to this edition, as well as expanded sections discussing theory, reproductive technologies, war and terrorism, and animals * Content allows teachers to discuss discrete practical issues (e.g., euthanasia), focus on the broader grouping of topics (e.g., life and death), or focus on common themes which bridge sections (sexism, moral standing, individualism and community) * Section introductions not only outline the basic issues discussed in the essays, but relate them to theoretical perspectives and practical issues discussed elsewhere in the book. * Guides students with supporting introductory essays on reading philosophy, theorizing about ethics, writing a philosophy paper, and a supporting web site at www.hughlafollette.com/eip4/

The Oxford Handbooks series is a major new initiative in academic publishing. Each volume offers an authoritative and up-to-date survey of original research in a particular subject area. Specially commissioned essays from leading figures in the discipline give critical examinations of the progress and direction of debates. Oxford Handbooks provide scholars and graduate students with compelling new perspectives upon a wide range of subjects in the humanities and social sciences. The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics is a lively and authoritative guide to current thought about ethical issues in all areas of human activity-personal, medical, sexual, social, political, judicial, and international, from the natural world to the world of business. Twenty-eight topics are covered in specially written surveys by leading figures in their fields: each gives an authoritative map of the ethical terrain, explaining how the debate has developed in recent years, engaging critically with the most notable work in the area, and pointing directions for future work. The Handbook will be essential reading, and a fascinating resource of ideas and information, for academics and students across a wide range of disciplines.

Nearly half of all privately owned firearms in the world are in American hands. The U.S. homicide rate is 6 times higher than the average of all developed countries, and more than three times higher than any individual country. Half of all homicides are committed with a firearm. Gun advocates claim that the high rate of private gun ownership does not contribute to this; some even argue that murder rates would be lower if only more people carried guns to defend themselves. Pro gun control advocates find the correlation between number of guns and gun violence an obvious one - and that it should be the starting point for discussion about gun control. Both sides think their cases are strong, and have created a political stalemate. Can the truth of these views be evaluated rationally and dispassionately? Hugh Lafollette argues the gun control debate is more complex than advocates on either side acknowledge. It requires resolving moral and legal questions about the nature of and limitations on rights, as well as the responsibility of government to protect citizens from risk. It requires assessing claims about the right to bear arms, as well as the right to be secure from harm caused by guns. Empirical findings must be considered-about the role of guns in causing harm, the degree to which private ownership of guns can protect innocent civilians from attacks by criminals, whether the government should be constrained by a well-armed citizenry, and the degree to which laws seriously limiting access to guns can be effectively enforced. Lafollette carefully sorts through all these conceptual, moral, and empirical claims. He concludes that all things considered, the U.S. does need more gun control than we have. He then proposes an indirect strategy for decreasing harm from firearms-requiring all gun owners to have liability insurance (something the NRA actually encourages) similar to that of car owners. Lafollette argues that this approach could reduce gun violence without the problem of government intrusion. Painstakingly fair and historically informed, the book is mainly designed for use in applied ethics and public policy courses, showcasing how one might approach a difficult topic with care and even-handedness in order to construct a rational argument. In Defense of Gun Control sorts through the conceptual, moral, and empirical claims to fairly assess arguments for and against serious gun control.