Singer's Bigger Arguments In Animal Liberation By Barbara Singer

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

Because we as humans are the ‘leaders’, so to say, it is only inevitable that we will seek to put our needs first, as a means of trying to live as long as possible. Likewise, it goes without saying that not all animals, even without ‘superior’ abilities such as the ability to talk and communicate with speech and build the technology that has for the most part taken over the planet, among other things that humans can do that other animals cannot, care about human existence. Examples exist where animals are openly hostile towards humans when given the chance. Animals, without a superior brain, sometimes act on the hostility, killing or injuring both other animals and humans, without a sense of morality. To place them on a mental level with humans would be a mistake for humanity. While we humans both need and want to survive (live) and animals are also trying to do the same thing, if the two things are in disagreement with one another, such as a ravenous bear facing a starving hunter in the woods, both species are going to do what it takes to keep from dying, and likely attack one another. Were it that the human were to believe to the hilt Singer’s argument, this would likely result in death in this particular situation, which most well-functioning and healthy humans would like to

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