Summary: In the article, Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research by Ed Yong, he approaches the issue of the rights to apes confronted by a pending Spanish law. The Great Ape Project (GAP), established in 1993, demands a basic set of morals and legal rights for chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos, and orangutans. In June, GAP was able to persuade the Spanish Parliament’s environmental committee to approve a resolution supporting these goals. Fortunately, other countries also took steps to protect great apes from experimentation.
The article, “Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?” by Ed Yong is trying to convince the reader to see a different side to primates. The Great Ape Project set legal rights for chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos, and orangutan. United Kingdom and New Zealand protect great apes from experimentation. For the Great Ape Project they are basically setting laws and higher standards for primates to me experimented on or held captive.
Celebrities Take a Stand against NASA’s Monkey Radiation Experiments Back in 2009, the US space agency National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) opted to fund a research proposed by Dr. Jack Bergman, a Behavior Pharmacologist at Harvard University Medical School’s McLean Hospital. Dr. Bergman has gained a reputation for his research studies done on primates over the past two decades. The research involved subjecting 27 squirrel monkeys to high-energy gamma-ray radiation, and then observing how they performed tasks afterward to see if the radiation affected them in any way. NASA considered funding the project to see how long-term space missions like trips to the moon or even to Mars can affect humans, since the experiment was a simulation of
The Monkey Drug Trials of 1969 The Monkey Drug Trials of 1969 was an experiment to show the aftermath of addiction, monkeys were self inflicting injury during this experiment. Monkeys were given an unlimited amount of cocaine, morphine, amphetamines, alcohol, methamphetamines, and other various drugs. They were also taught how to inject themselves with these various drugs. Many believe that this is unethical because monkeys were abusing themselves due to the teaching of the humans, their lives were in danger when they were under the influence, and some even overdosed.
All Quiet on the Western Front was written to show the horrors and intensity war has and that it is inevitably hell. Author Erich Maria Remarque was an intryman during the first World War and that was his inspiration for writing this novel. The book is written in a way to impact the reader with intense emotions and confused thoughts to really understand what the soldiers were experiencing on the war field. Remarque mentions many war technologies in the novel such as explosives, rifles, and toxic gases that show how deadly the war field can be. In chapter 6, Paul Baumer mentions the “[b]ombardment, barrage, curtain-fire, mines, gas, machine-guns, [and] hand-grenades” that lie in the war field, which are things to frighten the reader and therefore
Non-human primate testing is undeniably inhumane and cruel. However, I believe that it is a necessary evil that needs ethical improvement. While scientist are waiting for new alternative breakthroughs, they should also be in the process of adding enrichment activities when studying primates in order to get more true data and experiments. There’s no doubt primate testing can be a merciless task.
The Scopes Monkey Trial was an important event in history that still holds resonance today. The South during the 1920’s was still recovering from Reconstruction after the war. Which means that the South was not in favor of any National attention that could possibly be avoided. This case being in the South as well as being such a controversial topic, created a separation between the newer town of Dayton (did not mind attention) and the state of Tennessee(did not want attention). Out of which came an array of views on whether this trial should even be held or not.
Harlow's experiments on primates remain controversial, and most are seen as inhumane by today's standards. He was interested in the effects of stress, isolation, and abandonment on humans, and because of their psychological similarity to human beings, primates made ideal subjects. However, this psychological similarity is also the reason that many of Harlow's experiments are viewed as
The Scope Trial, or more commonly known as the “Monkey” Trial, was a battle between the ideology of creationism and evolutionism that challenged the American citizens’ belief in the Bible during the 1920’s. This trial had not simply strengthened the idea of evolutionism but also lead to the decline of morality, complete rejection of creationism, and the rise of faith in science. Although it took place over fifty years ago, the “Monkey” trial still has a grand influence to the spirit and general attitude of the American people in the modern era. The Scopes Trial was more than simple a prosecution trial; it was the day the downfall of fundamentalism began.
The Scopes Trail, also commonly referred to as the Scopes Monkey Trial, was one of the most famous and remembered court room scenes in American history. This trail is the perfect representation of the conflicting perspectives and beliefs between modernists and fundamentalists. Through class discussion, videos and readings regarding the Scopes Trial, it is extremely evident that there are constant interactions between church and state and there will always be conflicting beliefs surrounding religion, science, and state. Throughout the course of this paper, I will discuss the context and background of the trial, the facts and information on what actually happened, and finally the legacy and why this specific trial is one of the most significant
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
The Psychological concept I will be teaching is Harry Harlow experiment on maternal deprivation. He used monkeys in the place of children to show how if they preferred warmth and comfort over food. To conduct this experiment he separated the monkeys from their parents a few hours after birth, and replaced it with two different surrogate mothers. One was made out of hard wire but it produced milk, and the other was made out of a soft warm fabric with no milk. He put the monkey in the room with both of these surrogate mothers to test who the monkey spent most of its time with.
With the development of legal systems and the end of the Second World War, human beings pay more and more attention to their undeniable rights. Many struggles have done in order to achieve the equality of human rights and to against the violence of them within humans. However, whether human rights only belongs to human beings is a controversial issue. There are various opinions about if chimpanzees, which are the most complex non-human animals(Waldau & Whitman, 2002), also deserve human rights. This paper would argue that chimpanzees should be granted some of the basic human rights.
Although the experimentation of animals has furthered medical knowledge, it should not be allowed because it is brutal and animals are unable to give their approval. In order to do a study on humans it must be authorized by them, where animals are unable to give consent, which strikes questions in the world of science on whether this is morally acceptable. Although animal experimentation can result in saving the lives of millions, many find it to be cruel and unjust. Seeing as animals are unable to speak for themselves, they are still able to express their emotions through their behavior.
In my evidence one of the primary ethical justifications for conducting research with human subjects. Human experimentation can be needed to help everyone survive. Without human subjects or human experimentation the world wouldn't have things we need like medicine, cures for diseases, and more. While human experimentation can be bad or non-effective in helping people sometimes; but other times it can work
