CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Animal Law and WelfareLiterary and Philosophical StudiesPhilosophical Ethics and Theory

Odontocetes (‘toothed whales’): cognitive science and moral standing–are dolphins persons?

Open access
Pettit, Sara G., McCulloch, Steven P.·2023·Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research
DOI 10.1163/25889567-bja10033
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Odontocetes, or ‘toothed whales’, have a complex brain structure and possess rationality, self-awareness, sociability and culture. Cognitive science and modern theories of personhood challenge the notion that humans alone are moral persons. This paper reviews evidence from the cognitive science literature relevant to moral personhood in bottlenose dolphins, orcas, and beluga whales. It applies theories of personhood of Peter Singer, David DeGrazia, and Steven Wise, and finds that odontocetes fulfil criteria to be granted at least borderline personhood. The legal implications of attributing personhood to dolphins remains uncertain. Recognition of dolphin personhood may lead to fundamental legal rights against capture, captivity, and killing; alternatively, the courts may continue to restrict legal personhood and associated protections to human beings. Finally, despite the major influence of personhood on morality and law in the West, the biologically more widespread quality of sentience is sufficient for greater moral considerability and legal protections for nonhuman species.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/25889567-bja10033

Cites

121 of 121 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Belugas demonstrate advanced cognitive abilities involving visual and auditory sensory systems across many domains similar to apes, dolphins, and elephants.

    “Belugas demonstrate advanced cognitive abilities involving both their visual and auditory sensory systems across many domains similar to the capacities reported for apes, dolphins and elephants.”

    From Evidence for mirror self-recognition in beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) (2026) · cites this paper as [39]

    The paper describes beluga cognition in several domains, including quantity judgments (5.2 Intelligence, p. 15) and symbolic and vocal abilities (5.3 Language, p. 16). It does not establish that belugas have comparable visual and auditory cognitive capacities across many domains to apes, dolphins, and elephants; its discussion of visual and auditory memory is not specifically about belugas. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pettit, S. G., & McCulloch, S. P.
Affiliations
University of Winchester (GB)
ORCID
McCulloch, Steven P.
Venue
Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2023-01-18
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
109-144
ISSN
  • 2588-9559 (ISSN-L)
  • 2588-9567
DOI
10.1163/25889567-bja10033
OpenAlex
W4317211967
Cited by
5
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3
FWCI
8.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Literary and Philosophical Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
Keywords
odontocetes, moral personhood, sentience, cognitive science, Tursiops truncatus, ORCA, beluga whale, animal rights, legal personality, animal welfare legislation, Peter Singer, moral considerability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review