I agree with this, and I agree with Luke that non-human animals could plausibly have much higher (or much lower) moral weight than humans, if they turned out to be moral patients at all.
It may be worth emphasizing that “plausible ranges of moral weight” are likely to get a lot wider when we move from classical utilitarianism to other reasonably-plausible moral theories (even before we try to take moral uncertainty into account).
I agree with this, and I agree with Luke that non-human animals could plausibly have much higher (or much lower) moral weight than humans, if they turned out to be moral patients at all.
It may be worth emphasizing that “plausible ranges of moral weight” are likely to get a lot wider when we move from classical utilitarianism to other reasonably-plausible moral theories (even before we try to take moral uncertainty into account).