Reflective Empiricism and Empirical Animal Ethics

SIMPLE SUMMARY: A central methodological question in empirical ethics is how empirical research can inform normative analysis. This article attempts to answer this challenge by drawing on the philosophy of Iris Murdoch and Cora Diamond, defending Diamond’s concept reflective empiricism as an approach to empirical ethics. The article also discusses the relevance of these discussions for empirical animal ethics and argues that reflective empiricism can constitute a methodological approach in this field. ABSTRACT: The past few decades have seen a turn to the empirical in applied ethics. This article makes two contributions to debates on this turn: one with regard to methodology and the other with regard to scope. First, it considers empirical bioethics, which arose out of a protest against abstract theorizing in moral philosophy and a call for more sensitivity to lived experience. Though by now an established field, methodological discussions are still centred around the question of how empirical research can inform normative analysis. This article proposes an answer to this question that is based on Iris Murdoch’s criticism of the fact/value distinction and Cora Diamond’s concept of reflective empiricism. Second, the discussion takes as a point of departure a study on genome-edited farmed salmon that uses qualitative research interviews and focus groups. Although there are several animal ethics studies based in empirical data, there are few works on the methodological challenges raised by empirical ethics in this area. The article contributes to these discussions by arguing that reflective empiricism can constitute a methodological approach to animal ethics.