More handpicked essays just for you.
Utilitarianism essay for animal rights
PHI 208 week two discussion on utilitarianism and animal rights
Should keeping exotic animals be banned
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Utilitarianism essay for animal rights
According to Dr. Lalvani, under British rule, endangered species were protected and national parks were opened. Yet in reality, forests were logged and turned into farms for cash crops like indigo, cotton and tobacco. Resulting in higher temperatures, increased salt content in the soil making it harder to grow crops and reducing the amount of available water (Document 6). National parks are meant to save and protect both the land and animals living there. Logging those forests for the purpose of cash crops didn’t follow these two very simple guidelines.
In the testimony before the House Committee on the Public Lands on June 1913, Pinchot (an advocate for conservationists) stated that “the use of the park will be enormously increased” (Pinchot and Raker 2). This means the the ability to have multiple use of the land can allow the government to create more than just an attraction site, but also create activities and different things people can do there for a price. Also in the testimony before the House Committee on the Public Lands on June 1913, Pinchot also stated that “the national park will be visited by a very large number of people who cannot visit them now” (Pinchot and Raker). This gives government the opportunity to make money, because people would pay money in order to see the beauty of the land now that it is cleared up.
Summary Aldo Leopold is considered the most influential conservationist in the 20th century. His greatest idea was the “land ethic.” A quote from the movie says: “All ethics so far evolved rest upon a single premise that the individual is a member of a community of individual parts—land ethic includes soils, waters, plants and animals.” Although, Leopold died in 1948, his ideas are still current.
For vegetarians, animal rights should trump human rights. In “Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights,” Tom Regan defines animal rights as “the natural right to life” (307). Similar to Regan, many vegetarians believe that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. By switching to a plant-base diet, people will be able to alleviate the needless suffering and deaths of countless animals. Besides, in the same article, Regan also suggests “to treat animals in a more humane manner” (308).
Have you ever heard the deafening trumpet of an elephant or witnessed the quick and sudden turns of a cheetah? These natural wonders are merely a fraction of the countless species that compose the complex web of life on Earth. However, the continued presence of these creatures is becoming increasingly jeopardized, as human activities like habitat destruction and poaching are carried out. Enter the wildlife protection community, a network of passionate individuals who devote their efforts to preserving endangered species and their associated habitats. The wildlife protection community is a committed group of individuals who recognize the importance of conserving these creatures and their natural surroundings in order to maintain biodiversity,
Theodore Roosevelt set aside large parts of land to be conserved for future generations rather than be sold or developed. These lands eventually became major national parks and forests, containing wildlife and acres of forests and water. The idea was to ensure the sustainability of natural resources, and what's exactly what happened. The problem is, everything is growing.
Gifford Pinchot’s said that “humans belong in their environment, as inhabitants and stewards. This belief helped Teddy Roosevelt establish a land ethic use in which humans and nature could co-exist. This belief helps form a connection with humans and nature ensuring that humans respect our lands for what they are there for and that is to provide us with resources to survive. The US Department of Agriculture continues to follow this belief that was established by Roosevelt as they state “embodying the ethic of caring for lands while they simultaneously provide for a human population – a diverse human population with a multitude of needs and multiple uses”. The conservation movement has proved to be beneficial as its main goal is to still respect what has been given to
According to Elizabeth Harman, an action that kills an animal even painlessly, is an action that harms the animal. If we indeed have strong moral reasons against causing pain to animals, Harman argues we must also have strong moral reasons against killing animals. This raises an objection to the Surprising Claim, which states that we have strong reasons against causing intense pain to animals, but only weak reasons against killing animals. The First View claims that killing an animal deprives it of a positive benefit (future life) but does not harm the animal.
As animals underpopulated, us humans will take up more land to benefit ourselves. As we are taking up more land, we are taking away land from the animals that are left. This confines them, and also puts humans at risk for injury. If animals can see that humans are becoming more selfish over land, the animals may become more hostile and hurt humans. I can see how people would think this is okay--they just want to show off how “cool” they are.
Introduction This paper will explore my reflection on the enforcement perspective following the wildlife debate. First, I will review the relevant literature on the enforcement perspective. Following this, I will reflect on my experiences and learning following the wildlife debate and how it influenced my perspective on wildlife crimes. Specifically, I realize that the wildlife advocate perspective must have more influence over wildlife crime policies and funding as there are too many pre-existing issues within all other perspectives to meaningfully address wildlife crime and conservation issues.
I will argue in favor of Regan’s principle that non-human animals should have moral rights. Tom Regan, a famous philosopher, proposed the idea “that animals have rights based on their inherent value as experiencing subjects of life” (Regan). For thousands of years, animals have been used for as pets, food, and labor. Throughout the past century, many philosophers, including Regan, have raised arguments on how we, as humans, are treating animals poorly.
Abstract Human life is precious, then how about animals? Ending human life is considered as unethical and this is against the law. However, this does not apply to animals. Even though most families treat their animals as part of their family members, animal euthanasia is still a controversial issue nowadays. Millions of dogs are euthanized in each year and several methods are used by the veterinarian to put the animal to death.
Have you ever thought about which animals are near extinction or endangerment ? Have you looked them up? How many are left? Which ones have been removed? Do you know why they are going endangered?
Wildlife Conservation is often seen as a bad thing, but if you look at it from my perspective, then it is actually a good thing. People think of it as holding wild animals captive, but we are actually protecting them from poachers. The purpose of Wildlife Conservation is to protect the animals in danger, which I am in agreement 110%. Other people argue that we shouldn’t have conservations, but they don’t know the harm that can happen to unprotected animals.
Animal Rights Some people assume that just because animals cannot speak that they cannot feel pain. It is not okay to torture living beings that have their own thoughts and breathe the exact same air us humans breathe. It is unjust and selfish to stand by and take no action while everyday hundreds if not thousands of innocent animals die without reason. No matter how much fur or how many limbs the creature has; it should be treated as equal as a person. A heart beat is a heartbeat regardless of the body it’s in.
