Download file to see previous pages...
According to his theory, when value is given to all other humans regardless of their mental and rational abilities then the same value should be ascribed to the non-human animals as well. His arguments are based on the views of Immanuel Kant that all animals have moral rights but he criticizes Kant’s belief that only rational beings are subjected to respect. Regan rejects this view and argues that humans gain the value and respect regardless of their rationality as with infants and those who are mentally instable thus non-human animals are also subjected to the same value and respect regardless of their rationality. Since all human and non-human animals are subjects-of-a-life, life is the only attribute which would subject to value. Thus every being that is subject-of-a-life must be treated with respect and must be given moral rights (Regan, 2004).
On the other hand, utilitarianism is a theory which proposes that any action will be morally right only when it benefits and provides good to a large number of people. According to this theory, what’s right is determined by the value of pleasure or pain that it causes to other people. If an action causes pleasure to most of the people then it is considered as morally right while if it causes pain and suffering for the people, it will be considered morally wrong. Utilitarianism is often used to justify animal rights as their pain and pleasure is also counted for actions that are morally right or wrong (Brooman, 1997).
Utilitarian theorists believe that biologically it is justified that non-human animals are sentient and biologically they are able to feel pain and pleasure. This is justified also practically as many people have experienced such feelings in animals, especially cats and dogs. There is a lot of evidence that non-human animals are sentient and they feel
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
These laws that give protection to animal rights also govern the treatment which animals are projected to in medical research and slaughter for human consumption. Advocates have presented different approaches on animal rights. There is the protectionist side that looks at treatment of animals.
In the movie Legally Blonde 2, one of the subplots is how the lead character’s dog, Bruiser, looks for his mom and discover she is a test animal at a large cosmetic company. Will Smith’s movie I Am Legend featured rats that were being used for animal testing.
The premise of this paper is to delve into the consequences of these differences. The paper will study moral behaviour, human uniqueness, and consciousness or lack of consciousness. The first consequence of the difference between humans and animals is human uniqueness (Levinas, 2004 p48).
Still, others are vegetarians due to their religious beliefs as opposed to deep conviction. Similarly, those who kill animals and eat their flesh have their beliefs too. Some eat animal’s meat as a passive cultural norm inherently defining their feeding habits.
But scholars have failed to reach any unanimous conclusion. Anyway, while deciding whether animals should rights or not, the debaters mainly focus on several factors such as animal ability to learn, to use language, the level of their consciousness, their ability to feel pain, etc.
Although animal testing is commonly done for research and investigative propose, and is funded collectively by the society it's ethical implication, scientific need and basis and psychological effect of testing on animals are issues bothering various animal right activists as well as the general public.
Although that seems logical enough, slaughtering of animals in other places would involve “stabbing [sheep] through the eye with a long screwdriver and skinning live sheep and goats” (Hartwell). Now this seems too
Differing opinions are held by authorities all over the world. Laws regarding animal cruelty are aimed at preventing malicious cruelty towards animals. They are especially applied towards animal species not consumed as food in the country
Experimenting on animals is necessary when it unethical and impractical to experiment on humans.
However, it is established that a lot of these experiments cause pain and sufferings to the animals and reduces their quality of life. It is morally wrong
According to the report the movement has faced many setbacks in raising the national awareness of animal welfare. Conservationists have raised concerns about the welfare of farm animals. This paper will provide a discussion based on two perspectives that focus on the need for fair treatment of farm animals’ moment before they are slaughtered.
7 Pages(1750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Animal right for FREE!