Sagan, Singer, and The Capacity Argument
The capacity argument is an ethical issue which if proven wrong challenges the ways in which humans use and abuse animals. The controversy about whether or not animals should be equal to humans and if their capacity to feel pain should determine if they should or should not be deserving of equality. Carl Sagan, Peter Singer, and Jeremy Bentham have formed opinions about the Capacity Argument concerning issues of morality, equality, suffering, and pain in regards to the treatment of animals and the ways our species use them.
If animals were deemed deserving of equality and our species was forced to change this would be devastating for fur farms, meat production factories, businesses, dairy farms, science laboratories and many more companies. If it was considered to be morally wrong our species most likely would not change our ways because there is so much money involved in using animals. (Bentham, 1789, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Chapter xvii) States that, “The question is not, "Can they reason?" nor, "Can they talk?" but "Can they suffer?” Bentham developed
…show more content…
I don’t think that the way in which humans use animals is ethical and we use them for selfish reasons because it's easy and there is money to be made. There are many alternatives instead of using animals in the year 2018. Our species no longer require them for servile and I believe it is time for things to change in regards to the ways in which animals are made to suffer through animal testing, slaughter, and meat production farms where they are packed into close quarters. If we do not require them for servile any longer but yet we constantly kill even when it is not necessary. Human lives are not the only lives that matter but we seem to think along these