What can persistence studies tell us about the impact of social and technological change on attitudes towards animals in the future?
Context and Relevance: Persistence studies offer insights into how historical and technological changes shape long-term societal attitudes, including those towards animals. However, the robustness of these studies can be questioned due to issues such as spatial autocorrelation and underestimating standard errors. Understanding the persistence of moral progress, alongside technological and social changes, is crucial for predicting future attitudes toward animals and ensuring lasting impact. The idea of "trajectory change" also plays a role, examining how past moral victories have altered long-term trends in moral values.
Potential Research Approach:
Historical Trajectory of Moral Progress: Examine past moral victories, such as the abolition of slavery or advancements in animal welfare, to assess the long-term trajectory change. Consider how much of this change was driven by thoughtful actors (e.g., abolitionists) versus technological advancements (e.g., the decline of horses in farming and transport due to automobiles). Utilize counterfactual analysis to explore what might have happened if these events had followed different paths, such as a world where animal farming was reduced by social rather than technological change.
Technological Change and Moral Rubber Banding: Explore the concept of "rubber banding" in moral progress, where initial advancements might face reversion or recidivism. For example, a shift to animal-free food technologies (AFFT) could face position rubber banding, where a temporary move away from animal farming could revert if social attitudes and institutions do not support the change. Similarly, slope rubber banding could occur if the rate of moral progress does not accelerate even as technologies improve.
Impact of Technological Lock-In: Investigate how technological lock-in might shape future attitudes towards animals. Some technologies, once introduced, become difficult to reverse (e.g., animal-free food technologies), potentially creating a positive lock-in for animal welfare. Conversely, harmful technologies could also be locked in, as seen with the persistence of certain energy technologies. This concept can be expanded to consider interplanetary or interstellar colonization, where the spread of certain technologies or practices could have irreversible moral consequences.
Persistence of Social and Technological Influence: Utilize persistence studies to evaluate the lasting impact of both technological and social changes on attitudes towards animals. Consider the methodological critiques of such studies—such as the issues raised with spatial trends—and apply more rigorous analysis to predict the long-term effects of AFFT and other technologies on animal welfare.
Counterfactual Analysis in Moral Progress: Incorporate counterfactual thinking to assess whether the trajectory of animal welfare would have been different with alternative approaches. For instance, would animal welfare have progressed more quickly through legislative action rather than reliance on emerging technologies like AFFT? Examine historical examples, such as the abolition of slavery, to assess how thoughtful actors, technological changes, and random contingencies interacted to produce lasting moral outcomes.
Strategic Implications for Animal Advocacy: Explore how to balance technological advancements with social advocacy to avoid reliance on one at the expense of the other. Persistence studies and trajectory analysis suggest that moral victories may be temporary without institutional support, such as legal codification. Therefore, while AFFT offers promise, it should be supported by campaigns to solidify progress through policy changes to avoid rubber banding.
Additional Questions:
How does the concept of "rubber banding" apply to animal welfare, particularly in the context of new technologies like AFFT?
Can we predict which technological advancements in animal welfare will result in long-term trajectory changes?
What role do thoughtful actors play in shaping these technological shifts, and how can their actions complement technological advancements to avoid recidivism?
How do persistence studies inform the likelihood of enduring social change versus temporary shifts in moral attitudes towards animals?