Animal Rights Broad View - Animals have the same moral worth that humans have, and the moral obligations we have to animals are the same that we have.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Introduction to Ethics Lecture 19 Regan & The Case for Animal Rights

Advertisements

Swiss Animal Law Developments and International Comparison Dr. Gieri Bolliger Foundation for the Animal in the Law Conference «Animal Law and Ethics» Zurich,

Ethics Across the Curriculum.  Values Clarification  Presenting students cases and asking: “What do you think?”

Environmental Ethics. Definitions Moral Agents Those who have the freedom and rational capacity to be responsible for choices Those capable of moral reflection.

An Argument that Abortion is wrong

Why Abortion is Immoral

The Human Conscience in Animal Rights “Discrimination on the basis of sex, it has been said, is the last universally accepted form of discrimination, practiced.

Animal Welfare and Animal Rights Based on Kernohan, A. (2012). Environmental ethics: An interactive introduction. Buffalo, NY: Broadview Press, Chapters.

HUMANS AND NON-HUMANS A Spectrum “ Western ” paradigm emphasizes gulf between humans and animals ■ Religious traditions: humans as “the crown of creation”,

The Moral Status of Animals Kant, Singer, Steinbock.

The Case for Animals Singer’s Utilitarian Argument  What is morally relevant?  What makes someone/somethi ng worthy of moral consideration?  What.

Secular Responses Use of the Embryo. Utilitarianism Based on the idea of the greatest happiness for the greatest number or majority Also based on hedonism.

Ethical Theory.

From Last time Cognitivism vs. non-cognitivism Subjective descriptivism Cultural relativism Divine Command theory.

The Moral Status of the Non- Human World: Singer and Cohen.

Philosophy 220 The Moral Status of the Non-Human World: Cohen and Warren.

TOM REGAN’S ARGUMENT FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS The Rights View.

Morality and Social Policy Vice and Virtue in Everyday Life Chapter 7.

Animal Rights Arguments Julia Kirby Consulting author: Holly L.

Animals singer’s arguments. consciousness The Consciousness Account: Humans have special value because they alone are conscious. Something is conscious.

1 I I Animal Rights. 2 Singer’s Project Singer argues we should extend to other species the “basic principle of equality” that most of us recognize should.

Is goodness without God good enough?

Introduction to Ethics Lecture 19 Regan & The Case for Animal Rights By David Kelsey.

Chapter Eleven: Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics

24 th November To gather a brief outline of the history of animal rights and welfare To begin to consider the moral status of animals.

Why Philosophy?. Philosophy: A study of the processes governing thought and conduct. A system of principles for the conduct of life. A study of human.

“A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world.”

 The benefits of embryo research come mainly from stem cell usage  it is hoped that stem cells can be stimulated to develop any tissue or organ of the.

Utilitarianism or Consequentialism Good actions are those that result in good consequences. The moral value of an action is extrinsic to the action itself.

Peter Singer: “All Animals are Equal ”

Introduction to Ethics Lecture 20 Cohen & The Case for the Use of Animals in Biomedical Research By David Kelsey.

From Last time Noonan argues that because the fetus is a human being, and human beings have a right to life, then Abortion is immoral. Warren argues that.

Animal Rights Are you a speciesist?. Animal Rights in the News.

Chapter Eleven: Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics Review Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (10 th ed.) Julie C. Van Camp, Jeffrey Olen, Vincent.

Animals and Persons. Ethical status for animals Kantian and utilitarian ethics traditionally extended to all people, but only people Kant: all rational.

1 III Animal Rights. 2 Background This paper is a condensed version of the central argument presented in Regan’s 1983 book, The Case for Animal Rights.

Are anthropocentric ways of doing ethics intrinsically unethical Kant proposed that human life was intrinsically more valuable than other animal life because.

Chapter 10: Cloning and Genetic Enhancement John Robertson, “Liberty, Identity, and Human Cloning” – Robertson's main 3-part argumentative strategy Part.

AS Ethics Utilitarianism Title: - Preference Utilitarianism To begin… What is meant by preference? L/O: To understand Preference Utilitarianism.

MODERN UTILITARIANISM AND GENETIC ENGINEERING IS IT WRONG TO INTERFERE WITH NATURE? CAN WE JUSTIFY THE SACRIFICE OF A FEW LIVES TO SAVE MANY? DO ANIMALS.

What is the opposite of Utilitarianism? We are still addressing the question of HOW we should be moral.

Chapter 8: The Ethical Treatment of Animals Gaverick Matheny, “Utilitarianism and Animals” – Matheny's main 2-part argument (part 1): 1. Being sentient.

Philosophical approaches to animal ethics

Chapter 9: The Ethical Treatment of Animals

Michael Lacewing Eating animals Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.

PHI 208 RANK Life of the Mind/phi208rank.com

Personhood & the Euthanasia debate

Animal Welfare PHI 2630.

Animals and Persons.

Scand-LAS 2017, Copenhagen Peter Singer,

On Whiteboards: Do animals have any moral status (should they be considered when making moral decisions)? Whether you answered yes or no, say why. On what.

Evaluating utilitarianism

Moral Development The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, for example, has concluded on the basis of over twenty years of research that there is a.

Lecture 08: A Brief Summary

All animals are equal.

Lecture 09: A Brief Summary

Outline the naturalistic fallacy

Moral Development The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, for example, has concluded on the basis of over twenty years of research that there is a.

Should Animals Have Rights?

Moral Development The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, for example, has concluded on the basis of over twenty years of research that there is a.

Kant’s view on animals is ‘anthropocentric’ in that it is based on a sharp distinction between humans and non-human animals. According to Kant, only.

Animal ethics II William Sin 2012.

Kat Angelini & Miranda Chapman

Kant, Anderson, Marginal Cases

Lecture 06: A Brief Summary

Animal Suffering and Rights

All Animals are Created Equal

Speciesism and the Idea of Equality

Utilitarianism.

Presentation transcript:

Animal Rights Broad View - Animals have the same moral worth that humans have, and the moral obligations we have to animals are the same that we have to humans. Narrow View - Animals have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them. Moderate View - Animals have moral worth, but it is less than the moral worth that humans have. We have moral obligations to animals, but these obligations are weaker than the obligations we have to humans. Animal View - Animals have moral worth, but it is more than the moral worth that humans have. We have moral obligations to animals, and these obligations are stronger than the obligations we have to humans.

Narrow View R. D. Guthrie's Argument 1. How animals treat other animals is not a moral issue. 2. How animals treat humans is not a moral issue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. How humans treat animals is not (inherently) a moral issue. .: 4. Animals have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them.

R. D. Guthrie Mistreating animals can still be morally wrong because: Animals can be the property of person's who do have moral worth. Animals can be instrumentally valuable in promoting human welfare.

R. D. Guthrie Limitations Implies that it is morally permissible to mistreat unowned animals that are not instrumental in promoting human welfare. Implies that it is morally permissible for animal owners to mistreat their own animals that are not instrumental in promoting human welfare.

R. D. Guthrie 1. How animals treat other animals is not a moral issue. 2. How animals treat people is not a moral issue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. How people treat animals is not (inherently) a moral issue. .: 4. Animals have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them.

R. D. Guthrie Objection 1. How infants treat other infants is not a moral issue. 2. How infants treat other humans is not a moral issue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. How humans treat infants is not (inherently) a moral issue. .: 4. Infants have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them.

Narrow View Human Argument 1. Moral worth is a function of being human. 2. Only humans are human. --------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. Only humans have moral worth. .: 4. Animals have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them.

Moral Worth Is a Function of Being Human

Moral Worth Is a Function of Being Human

Moral Worth Is a Function of Being Human

Moral Worth Is a Function of Being Human

Peter Singer "Pain and suffering are bad and should be prevented or minimized, irrespective of the race, sex or species of the being that suffers....Pains of the same intensity and duration are equally bad, whether felt by humans or animals."

Peter Singer Racism - Favoring the interests of one being over another solely on the basis of a difference in race. Sexism - Favoring the interests of one being over another solely on the basis of a difference in sex. Speciesism - Favoring the interests of one being over another solely on the basis of a difference in species.

Human Argument Limitations Implies speciesism. Implies that "higher" beings, such as God, angels, and Martians, have no moral worth. Implies that it is morally permissible to abuse or torture animals for the mere fun of it.

Moderate View Capacities Argument 1. Moral worth is a function of a being's capacity for intelligence, rationality, self awareness, suffering, and moral reasoning. 2. Some animals have these capacities but humans have these capacities to a greater extent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. Some animals have moral worth, but it is less than the moral worth that humans have. .: 4. We have moral obligations to some animals, but these obligations are weaker than the obligations we have to humans

Capacities Argument Advantages Does not imply speciesism. Does not imply that "higher" beings, such as God, angels, and Martians, have no moral worth. Does not imply that it is morally permissible to abuse or torture animals for the mere fun of it. Does not imply that we should be morally indifferent between driving over a mouse and driving over a child.

Moral Worth

Moral Worth What is morally special about a being's capacity for intelligence, rationality, self awareness, suffering, and moral reasoning rather than its leaping ability, sense of smell, and capacity to bark?

Moral Worth

Moral Worth

Moral Worth

Moral Worth

Capacities Argument 1. Moral worth is a function of a being's capacity for intelligence, rationality, self awareness, suffering, and moral reasoning. 2. Some animals have these capacities but humans have these capacities to a greater extent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. Some animals have moral worth, but it is less than the moral worth that humans have. .: 4. We have moral obligations to some animals, but these obligations are weaker than the obligations we have to humans.

Capacities Argument Limitations It is not clear why moral worth should be a function of a being's capacity for intelligence, rationality, self awareness, suffering, and moral reasoning, as opposed to some other set of characteristics. If moral worth is a function of a being's capacity for intelligence, rationality, self awareness, suffering, and moral reasoning, not all humans have these characteristics to a greater extent in comparison to all other animals.

Moderate View Animals have moral worth, but it is less than the moral worth that humans have. We have moral obligations to animals, but these obligations are weaker than the obligations we have to humans.

Moderate View Objection 1. The Moderate View is correct only if there is a set of characteristics that all humans have to a greater degree in relation to all other animals. 2. There is no set of characteristics that all humans have to a greater degree in relation to all other animals. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- .: 3. The Moderate View is not correct.

Animal Rights Broad View - Animals have the same moral worth that humans have, and the moral obligations we have to animals are the same that we have to humans. Narrow View - Animals have no moral worth, and we have no moral obligations to them. Moderate View - Animals have moral worth, but it is less than the moral worth that humans have. We have moral obligations to animals, but these obligations are weaker than the obligations we have to humans.

Animal Rights What is the moral status of (nonhuman) animals and what moral obligations do we have to them?

Animal Rights Any plausible account of the characteristics that determine moral worth will have the consequence that some but not all humans have these characteristics to a greater extent in comparison to some animals.

Moderate Animal View Some humans have greater moral worth compared to some animals, and some animals have greater moral worth compared to some humans. In some cases the moral obligations we have to some animals is weaker than the moral obligations we have to some humans, and in some cases the moral obligations are greater.

Animal Rights

Animal Rights

Animal Rights