ipl-logo

Discussion Of Christopher Belshaw's Essay Meat

1087 Words5 Pages

Meat consumption is a growing practice in my cultures and countries around the world. In the essay Meat by Christopher Belshaw tackles the ethical question of whether it is morally justifiable to kill animals commonly consumed as food. This essay will explore the arguments surrounding the permissibility of killing animals for meat, Belshaw argues that animals do not possess the cognitive capacity for future-directed desires, unlike humans who can anticipate their own future and form desires related to it, as a result that it is not necessarily morally wrong to kill these animals for food. This essay will also look at the why Belshaw’s argument does not succeed by comparing the position of Peter Singer’s article All Animals Are Equal, which …show more content…

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. Belshaw's reliance on the absence of future-directed desires as the sole criterion for differentiating between human and animal moral status presents a significant weakness in his argument. Singer's critique, along with the perspectives of other animal rights proponents, highlights the importance of considering animals' capacity for suffering, their complex emotional lives, and the interconnectedness of their experiences. By broadening the scope of moral consideration to include animals' current well-being and inherent value, Singer challenges Belshaw's position and provides a more comprehensive ethical framework for addressing the moral implications of killing animals for food and other forms of

Show More
Related

Summary Of Jeremy Rifkin A Change Of Heart About Animals

248 Words | 1 Pages

In the op-ed piece “A Change of Heart about Animals”, Jeremy Rifkin emphasizes the similarities between humans and animals by providing results on scientific research studies to illustrate that humans should be more empathetic towards animals. In addition, he further explains how research results have changed the ways humans perceived animals and indicates solutions that were taken by other countries and organizations to help improve and protect animal rights. Rifkin provides examples that demonstrate animals have emotions, conceptual abilities, self awareness, and a sense of individualism just like humans. For example, Pigs crave for affection and get depressed easily when isolated, two birds Betty and Abel have tool making skills, Koko

Read More

An Analysis Of Against Meat By Jonathan Safran Foer

1009 Words | 5 Pages

Introduction In this article “Against Meat” (2009) Jonathan Safran Foer explains his experience from a young age until the present struggling whether being a vegetarian or an omnivore because he doesn’t want to hurt animals at the same time he can’t resist food because it tasted good. Jonathan Safran Foer is an American novelist (born February 21, 1977) He graduated from Princeton University with a degree in philosophy, in his freshman year he took a writing class from the novelist Joyce Carol.

Read More

Assess The Significance Of Norcross's Analogy

553 Words | 3 Pages

He explains of the stress filled lives these animals endure for the pleasure of humans. The humans are not properly aware of the situations of these animals. They are consistently in cramped cages in farms, while human’s sense of morality towards farm animals has been nonexistent. Norcross’s conclusion does not argue against eating meat, but he justifies it to an extent. Norcross compares two distinctive creatures in his argument, and their comparison does not justify his point of view.

Read More

Summary Of Jeremy Rifkin A Change Of Heart About Animals

445 Words | 2 Pages

In “A Change of Heart about Animals,” Jeremy Rifkin says “many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined.” By doing so, Rifkin tries to appeal to human emotions through the use of pathos, in order to reflect our current viewpoint to match his opinion. Although animals have cognitive abilities and emotions similar to humans, I have to disagree on the basis that we should not change the way that we normally treat animals because of survival of the fittest and that human lives should be put over animals’. Despite the fact that it seems inhumane to treat animals poorly, it is actually beneficial to the lives of people. Rifkin raises questions such as, “So what does all of this portend for the way we treat our fellow

Read More

Rhetorical Strategies In Eating Animals By Jonathan Safran Foer

577 Words | 3 Pages

as an instance, Foer argues that if we agree with it is inaccurate to purpose pointless suffering to animals, we must not support an industry that is based on their exploitation. by way of appealing to our experience of right and wrong, Foer encourages readers to take a extra vital study their intake

Read More

Bonnie Steinbock's Argument Analysis

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

Rhetorical Analysis Of 'Is Hunting Moral?'

813 Words | 4 Pages

While returning to his first arguments about how critics often argue that hunting is immoral because it requires intentionally inflicting harm on innocent creatures. Even people who are not comfortable should acknowledge that many animals have the capacity to suffer. If it is wrong to inflict unwanted pain or death on an animal, then it is wrong to hunt. Today it is hard to argue that human hunting is strictly necessary in the same way that hunting is necessary for animals. The objection from necessary harm holds that hunting is morally permissible only if it is necessary for the hunter’s survival.

Read More

Changing Our Outlook Of Animals During The Period Of 1800 To 1910

1293 Words | 6 Pages

They are objects one minute, beloved pets the next, remote then humanlike. Animals are objects that must be hunted fattened, harvested, slaughtered, and processed into meat and clothing. Simultaneously, people nurture their darling pets, call them by name, include them in their families, please them with plentiful food and luxurious accommodations and mourn them when they die[8]. People advocated for pets. They sought to speak for and protect as they were beloved.

Read More

Jeremy Rifkin A Change Of Heart About Animals

862 Words | 4 Pages

Many Americans blindly believe that animals deserve the same rights as humans, but little do they know about the differences between the welfare of animals and the rights of animals. In the article A Change of Heart about Animals, Jeremy Rifkin cleverly uses certain negative words in order to convince the readers that animals need to be given same rights as humans, and if not more. Research has shown that non-human animals have the ability to “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love” (Rifkin 33). Animals may be able to feel emotions, however this does not necessarily mean that they are able to understand what having rights mean. While humans must accept their moral responsibility to properly care for animals,

Read More

Analysis Of Michael Pollan´s An Animal's Place

324 Words | 2 Pages

In An Animal’s Place, Michael Pollan describes the growing acknowledgement of animal rights, particularly America’s decision between vegetarianism and meat-eating. However, this growing sense of sentiment towards animals is coupled with a growing sense of brutality in farms and science labs. According to Pollan, the lacking respect for specific species of animals lies in the fact that they are absent from human’s everyday lives; enabling them to avoid acknowledgment of what they are doing when partaking in brutality towards animals. He presents arguments for why vegetarianism would make sense in certain instances and why it would not and ultimately lead to the decision of eating-meat while treating the animals fairly in the process. Pollan

Read More

Harman's Arguments Against Killing Animals

497 Words | 2 Pages

According to Elizabeth Harman, an action that kills an animal even painlessly, is an action that harms the animal. If we indeed have strong moral reasons against causing pain to animals, Harman argues we must also have strong moral reasons against killing animals. This raises an objection to the Surprising Claim, which states that we have strong reasons against causing intense pain to animals, but only weak reasons against killing animals. The First View claims that killing an animal deprives it of a positive benefit (future life) but does not harm the animal.

Read More

Machan's Arguments Against Animal Rights

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

A Rhetorical Analysis Of All Animals Are Equal By Peter Singer

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

Conscientious Meat Eater Analysis

796 Words | 4 Pages

In the article, “Is It Possible to be a Conscientious Meat Eater”, the authors argue that processed meat can greatly affect the many things in our everyday life. Sunaura and Alexander’s argument is significantly unreliable because of the certain professions both authors yield. As stated in the article “Sunaura is an artist, writer, and activist in Oakland.” “Alexander’s profession is studying philosophy, and ethics in Athens, Georgia.” This shows that neither of them are qualified to argue in the subject of conscientious meat eaters.

Read More

Eating Meat Is Ethical Essay

768 Words | 4 Pages

In today’s world, there is a division among the people in the world regarding whether or not it is ethical to eat meat. After researching about eating meat and vegetarianism, I have come to the conclusion that it is indeed ethical to eat meat in today’s society. Sure, eating meat might have its drawbacks, but I have found that the benefits of eating meat far outweigh the negatives of eating it. Eating meat not only helps improve people’s health, but it also helps strengthen our economy and it has little difference in the environmental impact that involves in the farming of vegetables. Eating too much of anything usually results in a negative outcome.

Read More

More about Discussion Of Christopher Belshaw's Essay Meat

Related Topics

Open Document