Difficulties with Strong Rights Position Mary Anne Warren

Warren: rejects SRP; argues for WRP Weak animal rights (Warren): Strong animal rights position (Regan) - Non-human mammals have essentially the same moral rights Warren: rejects SRP; argues for WRP Weak animal rights (Warren): some non-human animals have rights Rights should extend to all sentient creatures – capable of experiencing pleasure pain Rights of animals are not identical in strength as rights of person

Regan’s View Equal inherent value of all Subjects-of-a-life Derive: strong moral rights Derive: Respect Principle: do not treat beings with inherent value as mere receptacles – mere means to an end Derive: Harm Principle – we have a direct prima facie duty not to harm being who have inherent value So, lead to moral rights Moral rights – claims to certain goods and against certain beings (they may be overridden)

Mystery of Inherent Value Inherent/Intrinsic Value “something is valuable for its own sake as opposed to being valuable for the sake of something else to which it is related in some way” Inherent value defined in negative terms E.g. inherent value is not instrumental value Like defining an abstract object – not a physical object Reasons to think that we cannot have just instrumental value – suppose there was only instrumental value then we do everything for the sake of something else; there would be no end that all other ends seek to accomplish This doesn’t tell us what intrinsic value is A non-natural property which we must take on faith (a postulate) What has inherent value?

The problem is that Regan view depends on their being inherent value of all subjects-of-life Respect principle (treat things as ends in themselves) But, can’t show connection if we don’t understand clearly inherent value

Drawing the line? Regan draws a sharp line Warren: difficult to know where the line is (given that we don’t know very much about how animals neurological systems work) What should we do given that we don’t know? Regan – benefit of doubt. Obj: but, then we would have to ascribe rights to a whole host of animals – where it is virtually impossible to live

Essay You are arguing for a position; heavily relying on Author’s on views Pick an issue (see question) Examples of Theses you might argue for: Critical Theses: Singer’s view fails – i.e. Singer fails to establish that we have any obligations to animas Singer’s view is correct – but not for the reasons he gives Agree with Singer (in which case you will have to consider some objections to the view that he does not consider, and/or elaborate on the objections given)

Sample Structure Intro: setup issue, say what you will be arguing for Exposition: Describe the view you are discussing How is this view supported? Is there an argument that is offered? A definition? Consider Objections: Objections that are taken up in the paper? Or from another paper? Replies. How would the person