ipl-logo

Peter Singer Animal Liberation Summary

1602 Words7 Pages

A11602683
In 1975, Peter Singer published his work, Animal Liberation, which is, as some animal activists have argued, the catalyst for the modern animal rights movement in the United States. In his work, Singer argues that the principle of equality requires that we not only take into consideration the interests of our fellow human beings, but also the interests of all beings with the capacity for suffering. Singer’s argument revolutionized the way many people thought about the treatment of animals – given that animals can suffer, there can be no moral justification for continuing the current practice of exploiting animals for our own interests and as such, activities like eating and experimenting on animals are morally unjustifiable and violate …show more content…

He states that if we are to take seriously the principle of equality, which allows us to say that all humans, despite the color of the skin or what abilities they possess, should be treated as equals, then we must commit and apply this same principle to our relation with the non-human animals. For example, if we believe discrimination against a disabled person for either their lack of mental capacity or their inability to communicate is wrong, then it is equally wrong to discriminate against animals who lack these abilities. Similarly, just as we should not disregard the interests of people who are not members of our race, we should not disregarded the interests of animals who are not members of our species. Like Jeremy Bentham, the father of modern utilitarianism, Singer believes people often draw arbitrary lines when determining whose interests should be taken into consideration. Historically speaking, sometimes the line is drawn based on gender, other times it is based race or abilities. Singer states that it is not the case that our predecessors have simply chosen the wrong characteristics to draw the “insuperable line” that determines whether the interests of a being should be considered. Therefore, the question is not, “Can they reason? Nor can they talk? But, can they suffer?” (588). Essentially, Singer makes the claim that the capacity for suffering is a necessity for having any interest at all; thus if a being is incapable of suffering, then there is nothing to be taken into

Show More
Related
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
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
250 Words | 1 Pages

Tracy Reiman from the Tribune news service describes animal rights and cruelty during a time of racism in the United States. She explains events from the past to compare the similarities of how we have treated other people to how we treat animals today. Her persuasive method is very effective and kept me tuned in the whole time by using pathos in almost all of her examples. Reiman’s use of comparisons along with her explanations from different perspectives really make the reader think and feel a connection. This is why I strongly support Reiman’s claims on animal rights and treatments.

Read More
1104 Words | 5 Pages

To begin, when talking about animals it can be a very sensitive subject mainly because the way animals are treated on farms, and how no one feels the need to question these actions. This is because many people feel this issue doesn’t concern them. In this essay Matthew Scully discusses the issue on how animals are treated and how they should be given more respect, and attention. Matthew Scully argues that animals in these factory farms are wrongfully treated, he uses biblical references and addresses the morals of humans to get conservatives to act on this matter.

Read More
742 Words | 3 Pages

Alastair Norcross takes the position in the animal rights argument that torturing animals for their use is unacceptable. He asks to consider a case where a man, Fred, lost his ability to enjoy chocolate because he lost the ability to produce Cocoamone. Fred’s doctor tells him that a recent study shows that, when puppies are tortured and then brutally killed, they produce cocoamone that Fred can then harvest. So Fred sets up his basement where he can torture puppies and then slaughter them in order to taste chocolate again. Norcross claims that this is obviously wrong and draws a correlation between Fred’s case and the situation where we cause chickens to suffer in order to mass produce their meat.

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
1293 Words | 6 Pages

Changing Our Outlook of Animals During the Period of 1800 to 1910 Short Essay Concerning the period of 1800 to 1910, many movements were formed addressing the lives and suffering of animals. Such movements granted better welfare for animals as well as a sentient outlook towards them. Animal protectionists in the nineteenth century worked to create legislation that granted animals immediate legal protections, as well as large-scale public education efforts to explain the harm of cruelty to animals in terms of the animals’ suffering[1]. As stated by Pearson in the Cow and the Plow, animal suffering was simply one of many potential definitions of cruelty’s damages, and when judges and other legal interpreters read animal protection statutes,

Read More
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
1694 Words | 7 Pages

“Suffering” is often seen as a pain that should be avoided at all costs. However, Rohr asserts that not only is suffering necessary to understand when you are living your best (from the experience of living your worst), but it is necessary to bring about the rise to your best. He furthers this assertion with the line, “Losing, failing, falling, sin, and the suffering that comes from those experiences‒ all of this is a necessary and even good part of the human journey” (xx). Finally, Rohr warns of the dangers of avoiding solving one’s problems, illustrating that “by denying their pain,

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
673 Words | 3 Pages

This quote essentially is a blueprint for the entirety of the argument, as it concludes that if an being can experience suffering, it is entitled to rights. The author explains that suffering is a vital element that gives a being the right to be considered equally. If a being is able to experience joy and suffering, it has the ability to develop and have interests. Singer gives an example of a rock vs mouse incident, to prove this claim, “A stone does not have interests because it cannot suffer. Nothing that we can do to it could possibly make any difference to its welfare...

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

One of Singer’s bigger arguments in Animal Liberation is that non-human animal’s pains are something to be concerned about if you are a human, and, as a human, you should go to lengths to ensure that an animal isn’t unduly hurt or inflicted pain upon, as best as you possibly can. The argument is based in the fact that, due to humans also being animals, but being the life-beings with the most control and seemingly the most will and ability to cause harm to other animals, humans should not put themselves above other animals. Animals, according to his reasoning, should not be placed on a hierarchy list, and they should not be subject to undue pain and suffering at the hands of humans, as other (morally rooted) humans attempt to not cause harm

Read More
655 Words | 3 Pages

For example, an individual might have a pet dog that lives with him. He or she has probably never even considered eating their beloved pet, but wouldn’t think twice about ordering a steak for lunch. If people eat cows regularly without thinking anything of it, why not eat a dog? The only answer to this is that humans have formed prejudice views based on species that make us perceive one animal as a loyal companion, and another as lunch. Marginal humans have inherent value which means they are granted rights.

Read More
855 Words | 4 Pages

Sartre Freedom and Anguish: In their belief system we are created for the sole reason that the

Read More
2076 Words | 9 Pages

The way singer explains this principle is through a utilitarian prospective, suggesting two viewpoints, Jeremy Bentham says “interest of every being affected by an action are to be taken into account and given the same weight as the like interests of any other being. ”(3) The second utilitarian, Henry Sidgwick, says “ the good of any one individual is of no more importance, from the point of view (if I may say so) of the Universe, than the good of any other. ”(3) Singer explains in these principles an aspect of achieving happiness and avoid pain.

Read More

More about Peter Singer Animal Liberation Summary

Related Topics

Open Document