Published 1 year ago

From the NS archive: Blood sports

Summary by Ground News

Clive Bell writes about the lack of rational arguments on both sides of the blood sports debate. As he understands it, the philosophical reason for condemning blood sports is that they give pleasure, and it is this that gives ethical significance to the action. If it is killing and giving pain that you object to, you had better give up trying to live, he writes.

0 Articles

All

Left

Center

Right

New Statesman

From the NS archive: Blood sports

Here the English art critic Clive Bell writes about the lack of “rational arguments” on both sides of the blood sports debate. As he understands it, the philosophical reason for condemning blood sports is that they give pleasure, and it is this that gives ethical significance to the action. “If it is killing and giving pain that you object to, you had better give up trying to live,” he writes – walking through a field, for example, it is impossi…

1 year ago

Read Full Article

Think freely.Subscribe and get full access to Ground NewsSubscriptions start at $9.99/year

Stories disproportionately reported by the Left or the Right

Ground News Article Assistant

Not enough coverage to generate an Article Assistant.