ipl-logo

The Ethical Debates About Animal Rights

1369 Words6 Pages

Eugene Prude
8 Dec. 2014
1123- 04
ELP150
There are speculations about animal rights. In particular there are two philosophers that argue each other about the topic. Peter Singer argues that “animals do have rights”. (mycourses)Carl Cohen argues that “animals have no rights”. (Steven M. Cahn. p. 339) This is very important topic because if animals do have rights, then there would be major changes that would take effect immediately in society. Each philosopher makes a valid argument. By the word valid, I mean each gives a set of premises and a true conclusion. In this paper, I will take the side of Carl Cohen and argue why animals have no rights. In my stance on this topic, Cohen says “animals have no right to life because they lack capacity. …show more content…

My response would be any animal that know the difference between right and wrong and could make the right decision every time should not be killed. Therefore no animal has the ability to distinguish right from wrong every time. For example, if a tiger sees a human in the wild, the tiger first instant would be to kill the human. This instant cannot be changed even if the tiger is not wild. This is not good judgment; therefore, animals can be killed. In conclusion, animals can be killed without punishment of others. Another objection to my theory would be, since there is a major difference between animals and humans; why do researchers act off of data that animals give off and then use it on humans. For example, vaccines are commonly researched. My response would be wouldn’t you want to test a vaccine on an animal before you try it on a human. For example, recently the disease Ebola has been an epidemic in Africa; we should test the Ebola vaccine on an animal before injecting a human with it, just in case the vaccine makes it worse. I think more people would like this utilitarianism way of thinking. The utilitarianism way of thinking is making sure that the greater number of people are happy in a

Show More
Related
1359 Words | 6 Pages

Major Rhetorical Strategies in The Grapes Of Wrath The Grapes of Wrath by novelist John Steinbeck is a classic novel, which can be credited to the way Steinbeck gets across his ideas about migrant workers in the Great Depression-era American Southwest. The book follows the Joad family, who come to California to find work, but instead discover the truth about the hardships in this promised land. Between the chapters about the Joads, interchapters appear; these provide more general accounts of the many migrant workers like the Joads. Steinbeck clearly does not agree with this treatment, and uses this book to help in ending the problem. Steinbeck expertly applies a somber yet passionate tone, personification, and dark imagery to both inform

Read More
654 Words | 3 Pages

The theory or idea that animal has rights comes from the rights that are traditionally moral and politically correct rights is a virtue from the type of culture that we are. Animal liberation comes from the utilitarian tradition that comes from ethics and mortality as coming about as a result of pleasure and/or pain, as someone’s overall well-being. When animals are caged harvest, this diminishes their well-being, which gives us the mortality that we address their decreased well-being and prescribes to us to liberate

Read More
722 Words | 3 Pages

Animals have always played a pivotal role in societies throughout the past. Some communities praise animals, while others use them as a symbol of wealth, and some sectors own animals merely as companions. Throughout the article “The Case Against Pets” Francione and Charlton (2015) argue that animals must not be property, and consequently need to gain basic animal rights. As law professors at Rutgers University, and publishers of a book about animal rights, the author’s viewpoints and research are held credible. Nevertheless, despite their arguments being supported by validated and reliable evidence, both authors are biased towards their viewpoints.

Read More
526 Words | 3 Pages

In the articles of Jeremy Rifkin, Victoria Braithwaite, and Ed Yong, there's a deep research and debate whether animals should be given the right to have human rights or not. All authors include their perspective on the issue and provide scientific evidence. However, I believe that there should be a separation of rights between animals and humans because there is no biological basis for drawing the line. Giving the right to apes, what factors exclude other mammals like dogs, cats, and birds.

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

Many Americans blindly believe that animals deserve the same rights as humans, but little do they know about the differences between the welfare of animals and the rights of animals. In the article A Change of Heart about Animals, Jeremy Rifkin cleverly uses certain negative words in order to convince the readers that animals need to be given same rights as humans, and if not more. Research has shown that non-human animals have the ability to “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love” (Rifkin 33). Animals may be able to feel emotions, however this does not necessarily mean that they are able to understand what having rights mean. While humans must accept their moral responsibility to properly care for animals,

Read More
1094 Words | 5 Pages

As previously mentioned, Taylor’s biocentrism argument positions non-human animals as teleological centres of life with an objective good of their own. In accordance with Taylor’s biocentric outlook on nature, non-human animals have legal rights. While he does not claim that these non-human animals have moral rights, he believes that these moral rights should be applied to nonhuman animals (Taylor, 218). If animals can be seen as teleological centers of life, then they ought to have legal rights. Since Taylor states that all living things have equal inherent worth, humans, acting as rational moral agents, are required to respect the moral equality of teleological centers of life and give the same respect to non-human animals that they do to human beings.

Read More
554 Words | 3 Pages

Since entitlements, freedoms and rights are all affixed, we can then look more closely at the differences between animals, humans and their independent abilities to obtain justices and compassion. Overall, compassion between humans and animals is contrasted due to the vast differences in the species and their understanding of their rights and entitlements for both themselves and each

Read More
1247 Words | 5 Pages

One argument that he addresses against animal rights is “Animals do not understand what rights are”(Regan 65) so they should not have rights. To this he responds, well children don’t know what kidneys are, therefore the child doesn’t have

Read More
703 Words | 3 Pages

Cohen argues that if we follow the basic principle of equality, we have to assume the following consequences: (1) both humans and animals don’t have rights, (2) animals have the same rights as humans do. Cohen right out states that these two consequences are utterly absurd and therefore the basic principle of equality is false thereby making Singer’s argument unsound. Cohen’s objection [partly] relies on Immanuel Kant’s idea that in order to be able to possess rights, a being must have the moral ability to do i.e. be able to use the right(s) to govern itself and others. Because animals are unable to do this, they do not have rights. However, Cohen adds that just because animals don’t have rights doesn’t mean we have to be careless in our regards towards them.

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

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
952 Words | 4 Pages

Imagine a world where the silent cries of suffering animals echo louder than our indifference. In her essay “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights,” Vicki Hearne probes into the neglect of animal well-being, a topic often overlooked by society. This paper will explore the significance of communication in forging meaningful human-animal relationships, evaluate the efficiency of current animal welfare laws, advocate for an ethical approach to animal responsibilities, and present successful instances of animal care. In her essay, “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights?” Hearne contends that animals possess intelligence surpassing human comprehension, advocating for mutual understanding and respect in our interactions with them.

Read More
1087 Words | 5 Pages

Meat consumption is a growing practice in my cultures and countries around the world. In the essay Meat by Christopher Belshaw tackles the ethical question of whether it is morally justifiable to kill animals commonly consumed as food. This essay will explore the arguments surrounding the permissibility of killing animals for meat, Belshaw argues that animals do not possess the cognitive capacity for future-directed desires, unlike humans who can anticipate their own future and form desires related to it, as a result that it is not necessarily morally wrong to kill these animals for food. This essay will also look at the why Belshaw’s argument does not succeed by comparing the position of Peter Singer’s article All Animals Are Equal, which

Read More
655 Words | 3 Pages

There is no rational premise for denying that animals have inherent value, therefore humans have no reasoning for denying animals of rights. Animals have the capacity to form relationships with their species, feel pain and pleasure, make decisions, and understand their life’s importance to them, therefor by inherent value, animals should have rights. An objection to this argument could target the claim that all animals have inherent value. Regan states that subjects-of-a-life have inherent value, and that the difference between subjects-of-a-life and other living organisms is that subjects-of-a-life are aware and value their lives.

Read More
967 Words | 4 Pages

The roles of both men and women have changed dramatically in today’s society. With the gradual uplift of the society, civic rights, citizenship and all those concepts, men and women have only just started to enjoy equality of rights. The traditional idea of men enjoying rights, and women shouldering responsibilities has undergone a change in the last few decades. However, the concept of “gender roles” is not to be confused with “sexuality”. Sexuality comes from within a person, while gender roles are imposed on a person from childhood, through adolescence until adulthood.

Read More

More about The Ethical Debates About Animal Rights

Related Topics

Open Document