Amoralist rationalism? A response to Joel Marks: commentary on "Animal abolitionism meets moral abolitionism: cutting the Gordian knot of applied ethics" by Joel Marks.

In a recent article, Joel Marks presents the amoralist argument against vivisection, or animal laboratory experimentation. He argues that ethical theories that seek to uncover some universal morality are in fact useless and unnecessary for ethical deliberations meant to determine what constitutes an appropriate action in a specific circumstance. I agree with Marks' conclusion. I too believe that vivisection is indefensible, both from a scientific and philosophical perspective. I also believe that we should become vegan (unfortunately, like the two philosophers mentioned by Marks, I too am still struggling to reduce my meat and dairy consumption). However, I am in the dark as to Marks' vision of normative deliberations in the spirit of amoralism and desirism.