Philosophers have pretty much judged that nonhuman animals can not act morally. On what do they base this judgment? The fact that only humans are capable of moral behavior. Well, if you define morality as something only humans have, then of course, you can say only humans are moral. That, of course, is circular reasoning. It also ignores Occam's Razor, which says that for something to be true, it can't rest on faulty hypotheses, and a priori judgements automatically fail the test of Occam's Razo...

This book challenges the assumption that morality is somehow unique to human beings. This challenge is issued through both philosophical critiques of speciesist understandings of morals, as well as by direct ethological evidence of justice in natural contexts.

Very interesting book. For those of us who have been close to animals other than hunting them the findings of these scientists are not surprising. The only complaint I have about the book was that the author seemed to keep apologizing to evolution for his findings. Really, truth is truth no matter whose sensibilities might be offended. But, that may have just been my impression.

If you are familiar with the works of the likes of Frans de Waal, Edward O. Wilson, Jane Goodall, [insert name of reputed ethologist/biologist], the subject matter of this book will not come to you as a surprise. In a way, its premisse, that of animals having a sense of justice, morality, fairness, all being evolved traits, is just a given. However, when you start to read the book, you know you are not the primary target audience of its message.The book presents its case in defense of the notion...

It's likely my fault for expecting this book to rely more heavily on hard science and studies, but I found the book and the conclusions that it drew to be terribly obvious. Studies are sited and mentioned, but not discussed in detail, which I really would have enjoyed. The book was written at such a basic level that it was a real chore to finish it.In the end, the authors posit that animals do indeed have morality. After that, though, they hesitate to go any further. My reaction upon finishing t...

I was a bit disappointed with the lack of science in this book, however, the authors make no claim that it is intended to be a scientific study of morality in non-human animals. Rather, the authors, a biologist and a philosopher, intend to raise the idea of morality in non-humans for consideration in the philosophical and scientific (as well as lay) communities. Their premise is essentially (I am oversimplifying) that certain behaviors in non-humans that are called "pro-social," are labeled "mor...

Published in 2009, this is quite an astonishing book setting forth the evidence for a renewed understanding of the animal kingdom beyond Darwin's "nature red in tooth and claw" to include notionsof morality such as cooperation, forgiveness, trust, empathy, and justice. Ethologist Marc Bekoff and philosopher Jessica Pierce team up to explore the scientific literature, including Marc's own years of study of animals and publications, within the framework of moral philosophy. The evidence is startli...

I was simply curious as to the statement that animals can be moral....and what does that mean.Was able to "connect" all videos and programs about how animals behave and why this behavior. what does it mean? Well--I think, if you read this book you will find out that we are not the only ones. And the fact that we are not really taking the time to study more animal behavior---even after these quite interesting findings. I guess--we always have to justify why we feel we are always superior--thus, w...

Really interesting concept, but a little dry and somewhat repetitive in the presentation. I think the same material condensed into a long-form article would have been more engaging. Some of the studies discussed are really interesting, and I enjoyed the last chapter which focused more on the philosophical arguments and implications of morality in animals. In the end I at least agreed with the authors' thesis that morality in animals differs primarily in degree and not in kind from human morality...

This is a great collaboration discussing the foundations of ethics/morality in the non-human world. In fact, morality is not human-specific. I always enjoy Bekoff's perspectives and willingness to step outside the "comfort zone" to say what he really believes he is observing in the world's non-human inhabitants.

Similarly to recent arguments about animal intelligence, ethologist Marc Bekoff and philosopher Jessica Pierce argue that morality in animals is species-specific and should not be judged against the measuring stick of human morality. Basing their conclusions off of evidence of cooperation/altruism, empathy, and justice/fairness in apes, monkeys, canids, rats, and more, Bekoff and Pierce argue that some animals do indeed have morality—just not necessarily the same kind of “reflective self-control...

What can I say about Wild Justice? Nothing great, that is for sure. I should be the target audience for Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals. I hold a degree in Biology and I am a vegan on moral/ethical grounds. But I found this book to be dull, dry, slow, basic and extremely repetitive. Oh boy was it repetitive.The preface itself is an extremely long winded summary of the book that seemed never ending. It literally seemed by the writing choices to be on the verge of ending a dozen times or

New subject matter for me. A mildly thought provoking book on animal psychology, arguing that some animals have evolved what we would call a sense of morality, roughly defined by three categories: cooperation, empathy, and justice. The book spends too much times defining it's terms (it is co-authored by a philosopher) and doesn't provide enough anecdotal illustrations.

Pretty good book. If you're not introduced or pretty versed in evolutionary biology and ecology concepts and lingo, I could see it being a pretty hard read. It's very easy to look over a lot of it without going in deeper and seriously considering and critiquing what they're arguing, and I think it's a great thought provoker, especially for others in the ecology/evolutionary biology fields. I don't completely agree with all of their arguments, but I definitely commend their deep thoughts and cons...

I have to admit that this book is completely different. I respect and appreciate the book for it's scientific subject and ethical and moral value. I found this book quite distinct from the intellectual, historical and literary books in general. The book taught me that all animals deserve respect, care, compassion and appreciation and how we all should be responsible toward animals.In this book, Marc Bekoff and Jessica Pierce deliver the moral behaviors of animals and the book focuses the percept...

It was well worth the time, very informative. However, the writing is in the academic style, dry and definition-laden, a real slog, but I guess necessary from the author's perspective. I just did my best to learn what I could of a fascinating subject. The examples given in narratives are powerful.

This book brings together science and ethics and thus can be appreciated by a wide audience. Bekoff and Pierce challenge the anthropocentric worldview that infests so much of our thinking, especially in discussions of what sorts of beings can act morally. By inviting us to consider a scientific definition of morality from an evolutionary standpoint, Bekoff and Pierce provide indisputable evidence and arguments that some of the actions of animals should be classified as moral. As an animal ethici...

I read pretty much everything Bekoff publishes, and here, Bekoff & Pierce make a convincing case for complex cognitive and emotional responses of animals in the arena of empathy, morality, and justice.

A worthy effort to philosophically consider the kinds of sensitivity, empathy, altruism or morality that animals display. But I felt the best and most helpful bits were the mini-stories of how animals behave. I know stories are not supposed to count in hardball scientific debate. But stories were all I cared about, all I will remember, and I think they speak louder than any philosophical argument.

For a subject I am intensely interested in, this was an intensely dull read. Some of the anecdotes of animal behavior we're interesting but I had heard a lot of them before. I also found interesting the authors perspective on anecdotes as evidence and their defense of those who get criticised for anthropomorphising animals in biological and philosophical discussions of animals. The overall sentiment of the book is one that I can definitely get behind but I thought the writing let it down.