In this article the predominant, purely theoretical perspectives on animal
ethics are questioned and two important sources for empirical data in the context of
animal ethics are discussed: (mostly qualitative) methods of the social and (mainly
quantitative) methods of the natural sciences. Including these methods can lead to
an empirical animal ethics approach that is far more adapted to the needs of humans
and nonhuman animals and more appropriate in different circumstances than a
purely theoretical concept solely premised on rational arguments. However, the
potential tension between lay people’s moral judgements and ethical theory must be
handled with care. The thorough analysis of qualitative data can lead to a deep
insight into e.g. ethical problems with the application of laws and guidelines,
practicality issues with ethical theories, personal ambivalence, and cognitive biases.
The interaction between animal ethics theory and empirical findings can lead to both
a more context-sensitive and applicable ethical theory and a less arbitrary folk moral
system. Findings from the natural sciences can also contribute valuable information
to animal ethics theory—the more we know about the properties and preferences of
nonhuman animals the better we can respect them. Here, however, it is vital not to
justify invasive procedures for the sake of ‘‘ethical progress’’. It might be ethically
required to forego some scientific findings about nonhuman animals if it is not clear
how much a procedure would harm them. Only with robust empirical methods will
light ultimately be shed on the nature of our moral relationship with animals.