Peter Singer and His Rationalization - Essay Example

Peter Singer and his Rationalization In an interview with ABC, Peter Singer intimated how he became a vegetarian and, in the process, rationalized his philosophy about animals or the way they are treated. In an anecdote, he explained that he stopped eating meat after a discourse with a colleague in a seminar, who offered him legitimate arguments about animals and how they are unjustly treated just so people could have meat to eat. Singer engaged in numerous rationalizations in the process of his becoming a vegetarian.

This began with his first encounter with the concept. The colleague mentioned the practice and that was the first Singer had heard about it. He became intrigued and, initially, it appeared that his rationalization was driven by the novelty of the concept. It appealed to his mind and thoughts so he started engaging the messenger in dialogue and learned further about the ethics involved in the treatment of animals. Then he started doing research to find evidence about those reasons that could justify the people's unjust treatment of the animals.

He found none. So he began establishing his own thought. He came to his fundamental rationalization that the norm, the existing thoughts, and arguments for the subject are insufficient rationalizations for the unethical treatment of animals. Afterward, he became an animal rights activist and became an important advocate of vegetarianism and ethics in science. A singer like other philosophers and sociologists who brought forward the concept of rationalization used objects or phenomena or artifacts in order to explain their own take on rationalization.

For instance, there was capitalism for Max Weber, the Holocaust for Zygmunt Bauman, and consumption for sociologists like George Ritzer. For Singer, it was ethics in the way animals are treated or ethics in medicine. His rationalization involved a process and elements. In my evaluation of Singers' points of view, I have engaged in some rationalization myself. There are points that I disagree with because they were different from or not aligned with practices that I am used to and comfortable with.

I immediately began to form some arguments against his positions according to such practices. For instance, I cannot be a vegetarian since I like meat in my food, so I quickly thought about the natural order of things like how other animals kill or maim others so they can be eaten in order for them to survive. I thought, humans killing animals is within the natural scheme of things.