CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Speciesism

special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 23, 2026
Entity authorityQ203986
Source-derived summary

Speciesism () is a term used in philosophy and animal ethics for the treatment of individuals according to their species membership. The term has several definitions. Some writers define it as discrimination or unjustified treatment based on species membership, while others define it more broadly as prioritizing some species over others, regardless of whether that prioritization is justified. Richard D. Ryder, who coined the term, defined it as "a prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species".

The concept is used by philosophers, psychologists, sociologists and animal rights advocates to analyse differences in how humans treat non-human animals. Writers on the subject have applied it to practices including factory farming, animal slaughter, blood sports, the use of animals for fur and leather, animal testing, and the treatment of animals classified as feral or invasive. Some authors also connect speciesism with the refusal to assist animals suffering in the wild when their suffering results from natural processes.

The term first appeared in 1970 in a pamphlet by Ryder protesting against animal experimentation. It was later popularized by Peter Singer in Animal Liberation (1975). Other writers associated with the concept include Oscar Horta, Steven M. Wise, Gary L. Francione, Melanie Joy, David Nibert, Steven Best, and Ingrid Newkirk.

Editorial summary

“Speciesism” enters the record as special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Speciesism, special and consideration can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1970, 1975—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Speciesism, special and consideration.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Speciesism” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Speciesism, special and consideration provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q203986. The Library of Congress control number is sh00007220. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1970 and 1975.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Speciesism”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Speciesism primary sources, Speciesism archive and Speciesism research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Speciesism”?
  2. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Speciesism” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.