ipl-logo

Ethical Differences Between Speciesism And Animal Rights

964 Words4 Pages

Speciesism, in applied ethics, means a justified bias towards the interests of members of one species over the interests of members of other species for the sole reason of belonging to two different species. The term is used by animal rights advocates to describe the practice of favouring the interests of humans over the interests of non-humans and giving humans a special status that other non-humans do not have.
Speciesism, as a term, was introduced by the philosopher Richard Ryder in the 1970s and has become more popular in applied ethics as the movement of animal liberation led by Peter Singer gained international attention in recent years.
Speciesism is a justification for giving humans an intrinsic value that other species do not possess. There are differences between humans and animals biologically. Humans possess abilities that other animals do not have. But these differences should not be ground for giving the interest of humans an advantage over the interest of other species. There are differences between men and women and these differences result in some differences in rights given to men and women. Men for example do not need the right to abortion, that is because they cannot get pregnant and thus the right to abortion is irrelevant to them. It would be absurd to …show more content…

If an animal can suffer then morally we obliged to stop its suffering and to ease its pain. The animal’s suffering is not very different from a human’s suffering, they can both feel pain. The intensity of the pain they feel can be different though. If you slap a baby, the baby would start crying write away because of the intensity of the pain you exerted on it. If you slap a donkey though, then the intensity of the pain felt by the donkey would not be very significant due to the biology of the donkey. You would need more force to make the donkey feel the same intensity of pain as the

Show More
Related

Similarities Between Utilitarianism And Animal Rights

269 Words | 2 Pages

For vegetarians, animal rights should trump human rights. In “Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights,” Tom Regan defines animal rights as “the natural right to life” (307). Similar to Regan, many vegetarians believe that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. By switching to a plant-base diet, people will be able to alleviate the needless suffering and deaths of countless animals. Besides, in the same article, Regan also suggests “to treat animals in a more humane manner” (308).

Read More

Summary Of Jeremy Rifkin A Change Of Heart About Animals

534 Words | 3 Pages

Most animals feel pain and we kill them all the time and even do laboratory experiments that are

Read More

Anthnocentrism: The Kantian Perspective

397 Words | 2 Pages

Like anthropocentrism, speciesism is also seen as human beings and is given more preference than animals since we both belong to different species in some ways. Two different philosophers Singer and Steinbock view speciesism differently. First, Singer has argued that both animals and human beings are being treated differently. Animals are being used for our needs without any regards for their pain and suffering, according to Singer. Whereas, Steinbock has said that there is nothing wrong being speciesism, where we put human need before those of

Read More

A Change Of Heart About Animals Summary

557 Words | 3 Pages

I agree with Rifkins point of view for the fact that we need to change the way we treat animals because they’re similar to us human beings. In the first place , animals cannot verbally communicate their pain. Dogs may bark so that people can notice behaviour change. Animals rely on humans to observe , recognize their pain and to evaluate its severity and impact.

Read More

A Change Of Heart About Animals Analysis

526 Words | 3 Pages

In Jeremy Rifkin’s article, “A Change of Heart about Animals”, proves his statement that many of our fellow creatures also “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love..”. I agree that animals share similar feelings as us, and I believe that they should be treated in a way that they can feel comfortable and care in their surroundings. Just because animals may not be completely the same as us, that should not give the right to a human to mistreat and abuse of an animal’s life. Animals can be well treated and cared for without giving them the right to be treated as a human.

Read More

GEH 1010 Group Presentation Analysis

691 Words | 3 Pages

Presenting both perspective, for and against nonhuman justice which allowed to cover all ideas revolving around nonhuman justice and conclude on our final answer that nonhumans deserve social justice. Focusing on why animals should

Read More

Singer's Argument For Equality In Society

703 Words | 3 Pages

Singer’s argument in favor of the claim that speciesism is false can be formulated as follows. Singer prefaces his argument with examples of how minority groups have in the past presented their respective (yet similar) arguments for their equality in society. He continues to explore the idea that the differences between races and genders should not be discerning factors in the decision of who get which rights; because all subcategories fall under the same grand category (the species they belong to), they should all have the same rights. However, as Singer points out, for most people, the differences between humans and other beings are significant enough to be reflected in the set of rights that each cohort has [doesn’t].

Read More

Machan's Arguments Against Animal Rights

1408 Words | 6 Pages

It is argued then that because of this, do infants and the mentally-challenged not have rights either? While this is a plausible objection, it fails, because Machan’s argument doesn’t attribute rights to just moral agents, his argument attributes rights specifically to all humans. Machan constructs his argument on the basis that rights are attributed to species or kinds, not by individuals. He makes it clear that this is the correct way to attribute rights by his examination of nature’s hierarchy. He describes that kinds of things are what are judged on a similar basis.

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

Peter Singer's Views On Speciesism

940 Words | 4 Pages

Speciesism refers to the concept of prioritizing a species, or viewing a species, as more worthy of moral consideration than another. It emphasizes the idea of a superior status and a sense of a higher-ranking hierarchical pyramid between humans and nonhuman animals. It could take the form of human supremacism, meaning that human interests are thus more important than those of animals. Sentience is the notion behind what gives a being the right to moral consideration. This more specifically follows the premise of one's ability to feel and sense pleasure and pain.

Read More

Peter Singer Speciesism

461 Words | 2 Pages

Peter Singer’s article, “Speciesism and the Equality of Animals,” claims that human beings should apply the principle of equal consideration of interests to nonhuman beings as well as human beings, and Singer asserts that the capacity for suffering is an important characteristic that gives a human or nonhuman being the right to equal consideration. Simply put, human beings should treat other human beings and nonhuman beings equally. Peter Singer, the Australian philosopher, defines speciesism “as a prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those members of other species” (277); therefore, Singer’s principle of equal consideration of interests is extremely valuable because it sheds insight against speciesism, such that speciesism is similar to racism and sexism. Peter Singer begins his argument against speciesism by agreeing with the philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, that a full-grown horse or dog is a more of a conversable and rational animal than a newborn child (Bentham qtd. in Singer 278).

Read More

Singer's Bigger Arguments In Animal Liberation By Barbara Singer

767 Words | 4 Pages

As humans, we know what we perceive to be pain and what it may possibly feel like, physically; there is no discernable way for humans to tell what causes pain to an animal, as they are incapable of communicating these thoughts they would have with us. While it is likely that they do feel pain, as we certainly do, there is no acute way for us to know this, despite best efforts and relating what happens to us to what happens to them. Their lack of ability to speak to us and communicate, does, at least to some level, put us above

Read More

Bernard Williams And Peter Singer Analysis

1149 Words | 5 Pages

Williams uses the term instead of ‘speciesism’, to label the way we act towards beings outside of our species. The definition is equivalent, and the use comes down to disagreeing that this attitude is analogous to other “isms” such as racism (Williams 2009, p. 139). Williams explains that racists often didn't, and still don't use different race as the fundamental basis for demonstrating inequality, such as “because they are black”. Usually this type of racial discrimination is founded on an assessment of the “intellectual and moral weakness of blacks” (Williams 2009, p. 140). The exploitation of animals that results from ‘speciesism’, in contrast, requires little more justification than non-human status (Williams 2009, p. 140).

Read More

Utilitarianism: The Morality Of Killing Animals

553 Words | 3 Pages

But, what happens if the animal does not suffer? Imagine an animal that live an enjoyable life that is worth living. If we could kill that animal with no physical or emotional distress, would it be moral? The

Read More

Animal Rights Argumentative Essay

1084 Words | 5 Pages

In 1789 Jeremy Bentham, one of the very first animal rights activists, argued that animals should be treated with equality due to the fact that they are sentient. Meaning that not only are they aware of perception, but receptive to

Read More

More about Ethical Differences Between Speciesism And Animal Rights

Related Topics

Open Document