ipl-logo

Analysis Of Stimulus 2, By Francie Patterson And Wendy Gordon

1220 Words5 Pages

“Does this induvial have a claim to basic moral rights?” (page 720. In “Stimulus 2” on page 72 of the Philosophy: Being Human book Francie Patterson and Wendy Gordon claim that very sentient animals or highly functioning beings deserve to be considered persons and treated morally. The reason this topic is heavily debated is “according to law, only a natural person or legal personality has rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities, and legal liability.” (platostanford.edu) Since some animals meet certain requirements to be persons, therefore they should be persons. Through our time we have only given the title of personhood to humans, but with the knowledge and science we have now we should have no choice but grant basic moral rights and personhood to highly developed or sentient animals. In “Stimulus 2,” …show more content…

According to Webster’s dictionary sentient as the ability to perceive or feel things. Patterson says “She cries when hurt or left alone, screams when frightened or angered” (page 72). So by the definition of Webster’s dictionary she is sentient. Throughout history there have been humans that have not been considered “persons” such as slaves and for some time women. In my opinion it is only a matter of time before we considered kowko the gorilla a person or any other highly intelligent animal. In the world there are theories that define persons as consciousness, reason, or autonomy. They use these same definitions to deny animals the right to personhood. I understand that they do not have human DNA and the people who believe you need that to be a person and I cannot argue against that standard. But what I can argue against is when

Show More
Related
864 Words | 4 Pages

As said by Lois Frazier, “Animals have a right to live without being confined, exploited, tormented, or eaten.” With the similarities animals have with humans, this right is something animals should possess, hence the animal-rights laws. Animals deserve to live in a comfortable environment just as humans do. However even with similar skills, just as Koko the gorilla has language skills, animals would not need them for survival the way humans do. Humans communicate through their own languages, but these languages may not be necessary for Koko.

Read More
722 Words | 3 Pages

Animals have always played a pivotal role in societies throughout the past. Some communities praise animals, while others use them as a symbol of wealth, and some sectors own animals merely as companions. Throughout the article “The Case Against Pets” Francione and Charlton (2015) argue that animals must not be property, and consequently need to gain basic animal rights. As law professors at Rutgers University, and publishers of a book about animal rights, the author’s viewpoints and research are held credible. Nevertheless, despite their arguments being supported by validated and reliable evidence, both authors are biased towards their viewpoints.

Read More
782 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will focus on Bonnie Steinbock’s claim on whether or not we should give equal moral consideration to species outside our own species group. I will first determine what moral concern means, according to Peter singer, and explain how he views the human treatment of animals. I will then outline Steinbock’s argument against Singer’s position and explain how her criticism is part of a much broader issue: that is moral concern. I will finally make my argument against Steinbock as well as address any issues she could possibly raise against my argument. Peter Singer believed that all species, whether it be human or non-human, deserve equal consideration of interests and quality of life.

Read More
969 Words | 4 Pages

Koko understands English, and has an IQ between 75 and 95 (8). He shows that animals have the ability to learn sophisticated language; which was thought to be exclusive to our species. Koko is as intelligent as an average human being which shows the ability that animals can learn as much as human can. However, she might be a special case. Maybe, if other gorillas were taught sign language, they would be more like Koko.

Read More
526 Words | 3 Pages

Yong includes the viewpoint of a Primatologist, Frans de Waal of Emory University, which states that, “ ...but if we give rights to apes, what would be the compelling reason to not give rights to monkeys, dogs, rats, and so on.” I strongly agree with Frans de Waal’s opinion because there is no clear place to draw the line. If one mammal is given human rights because, “they feel pain” and “share similar human qualities as us” then, many other mammals should have the same authority to receive those human rights. Therefore, I believe there should be a line drawn between the distinguishment of human and apes, because were are similar but not completely the same

Read More
1094 Words | 5 Pages

As previously mentioned, Taylor’s biocentrism argument positions non-human animals as teleological centres of life with an objective good of their own. In accordance with Taylor’s biocentric outlook on nature, non-human animals have legal rights. While he does not claim that these non-human animals have moral rights, he believes that these moral rights should be applied to nonhuman animals (Taylor, 218). If animals can be seen as teleological centers of life, then they ought to have legal rights. Since Taylor states that all living things have equal inherent worth, humans, acting as rational moral agents, are required to respect the moral equality of teleological centers of life and give the same respect to non-human animals that they do to human beings.

Read More
475 Words | 2 Pages

The argument presented by Lori Gruen questions the idea of natural and normative. Lori Gruen introduces the idea of natural, pondering the idea as something instinctual or cultural. The traditionally defended argument is that dominating animals in any sense is valid since it serves our self desires(47). Furthermore, perceiving it as an evolutionary necessity as humans developed the ability to further their own interests at the expense of moral agents. On the other hand, Gruen argues the claim of evolutionary necessity is not morally permissible, and justifying the lack of moral attention for the interests of other species for the rudimentary differences between her, a moral agent, and a moral patient.

Read More
423 Words | 2 Pages

(Carruthers, 1999, p. 114). “Someone who argues that since animals do not have rights,

Read More
1408 Words | 6 Pages

One topic that many scholars are debating right now is the topic of animal rights. The questions are, on what basis are rights given, and do animals possess rights? Two prominent scholars, Tom Regan and Tibor Machan, each give compelling arguments about animal rights, Regan for them and Machan against them. Machan makes the sharp statement, “Animals have no rights need no liberation” (Machan, p. 480). This statement was made in direct opposition to Regan who says, “Reason compels us to recognize the equal inherent value of these animals and, with this, their equal right to be treated with respect” (Regan, p. 477).

Read More
750 Words | 3 Pages

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that endorses the pursuit of well-being as the best course of action for a good life. One prevalent subject surrounding utilitarianism, and ethics in general, is the treatment of animals in relation to the treatment of humans. While there are many different opinions on correct animal treatment, utilitarianism is one that argues that some humans are morally equal to some animals. This essay further explains the utilitarian view of moral equivalency between humans and animals and why it is an accurate claim. Utilitarianism offers the claim that humans and animals can be considered equals and therefore treated equally in similar situations.

Read More
673 Words | 3 Pages

In the article All Animals Are Equal, written by Peter Singer addresses the inadequacies surrounding the rights of animals in the societies of today. Singer opens the article by presenting a scholarly parallels between the fight for gender equality, banishment of racism and the establishment of rights for “nonhumans.” In order to explain this constant set of inequalities that seem to riddle our society, Singer readily uses the term “speciesism”, which he acquired from a fellow animals rights advocator, Richard Ryder. Essentially, this term is defined by Singer as a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species. Singer claims that if this idea of speciesism

Read More
1087 Words | 5 Pages

Animals display a range of emotions, including joy, grief, fear, and empathy, which further challenge Belshaw's reductionist approach to their moral status. Moreover, Belshaw's argument appears to underestimate the interconnectedness of an animal's experiences and the potential consequences of causing harm to them at any stage of their lives. By disregarding the continuity of an animal's consciousness, he fails to acknowledge the moral implications of inflicting suffering and pain upon these sentient beings. Singer's work emphasizes the importance of recognizing animals' inherent value and extending basic rights to them. Regan's concept of "subjects-of-a-life" posits that animals are moral entities deserving of respect and consideration because they have experiences, desires, and preferences that matter to them.

Read More
1170 Words | 5 Pages

In human history, a number of oppressed groups have campaigned for equality, demanding for an expansion on the moral view of life, and to be treated fairly in the eye of consideration. This means that when the matter concerns this group, their voices are heard, and treated with value, and consideration. Where this equality is not determined by an assembly of facts like that group’s collective intelligence level, the colour of their skin, or the physical strength of their bodies. This is what Peter Singer brings up in his essay: “All Animals are Equal”, that non-human animals should have equal consideration with humans when matters concern them. Going into a specific set of non-human animals known as primates, I argue that primates should have some of the fundamental rights and equal consideration that are given to humans.

Read More
1574 Words | 7 Pages

Thus, even if animals did possess the right to live, it would be utterly pointless relative to our

Read More
1259 Words | 6 Pages

In the deontological theory Human rights argument can be used in 2 ways: A. In Favor: Many pro-choice philosophers acknowledge that the fetus is indeed a being worthy of respect and some degree of moral consideration, and that abortion, although a procedure women have a right to obtain. However, most of them argue that the fetus is not rational and do not possess the cognitive traits of personhood hence have no rights, but a woman has full rights on her own body. B. Against: Many pro-life philosophers have invoked the formula of humanity in order to argue that embryos and fetuses are worthy of the same level of dignity and respect Kant would ascribe to any other person.

Read More

More about Analysis Of Stimulus 2, By Francie Patterson And Wendy Gordon

Related Topics

Open Document