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

Can animals ever be seriously regarded as the equal of humans? 2+2=4

What do we mean by ‘moral status’? Status – your place in the hierarchy; the value placed on you as a consequence of your role or position in life, or, perhaps your belonging to a species. Moral – what is right and what is wrong according to a given ethical system.

Animal rights is the argument that the interests of animals should be afforded the same consideration as the similar interests of humans – that animals should be regarded as members of the moral community with ‘rights’, and not as things or property.

Very recent empirical discoveries include evidence of altruism – the capacity to act in a disinterested way for the good of others. Animals which live in communities often exhibit signs of morality which resembles human behaviour.

Socrates Plato Aristotle Alexander The Great

Aristotle believed women to be colder than men and a lower form of life. His views held sway well into the 16 th century when some Christian philosophers were arguing about whether women possessed a soul. They certainly weren’t considered capable of reason.

He wrote the History of Animals in 350 BC Aristotle's classification of animals grouped together animals with similar characters into genera and then distinguished the species within the genera. He also divided animals in a 2-group and 3-group system. The 2 group system was blood and bloodless and the three group system was in terms of their movement: walking, flying and swimming (land, air or water). He argued that animals existed purely for the benefit of human beings.

Descartes ‘I think therefore I am’ The year 1641 was significant for the idea of animal rights. Descartes views on animals and their status has informed our views well into the twentieth century. He was a dualist – arguing that mind and matter were separate. Human beings were mind; non-humans, including animals, were matter – without souls, sense, or reason. They may see, hear, touch, but they are not conscious. He argued they are incapable of suffering and feeling pain. The sounds animals make do not constitute a language in any sense of that word.

Oliver Cromwell The Puritans passed animal protection legislation in England too. Cromwell disliked blood sports. The Puritans interpreted the dominion of man over animals in the Bible to mean responsible stewardship, rather than ownership. The opposition to blood sports became part of what was seen as Puritan interference in people's lives, which became a reason to hate and resist them.

John Locke A 16 th century philosopher who argued that animals have feelings and unnecessary cruelty was wrong. But the harm done by cruelty was not to the animal but to the owner, or the person administering the cruelty. He said children should be discouraged from being cruel to animals because it would eventually make them cruel to humans.

Rousseau An eighteenth century philosopher who said that animals were part of natural law – they were not capable of reason but they were sentient beings. They cannot have moral rights because they do not have a moral nature but they share, in part, some aspects of human nature through their feelings.

Kant Eighteenth century German philosopher Augustine, Aquinas, and Locke, opposed the idea that humans have duties toward non-humans. For Kant, cruelty to animals was wrong solely on the grounds that it was bad for humankind.

The 19th century saw an explosion of interest in animal protection, - from 1800 onwards, there were several attempts in England to introduce animal welfare or rights legislation., in particular against bull baiting and other unnecessary cruelties.

1824: Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals The 19 th century saw the beginning of direct action in defence of animal rights and animal welfare.

Attitudes to animals began to harden in the late 1890s, when scientists embraced the idea that what they saw as anthropomorphism — the attribution of human qualities to non-humans—was unscientific. This takes us back to Descartes and the idea that animals are purely mechanical creatures – with no more feeling than a clock!

1960s: Formation of the Oxford group A small group of intellectuals began to view the increasing use of animals as unacceptable exploitation.

In 1973 Peter Singer first put forward his arguments in favour of animal liberation, which have become pivotal within the movement. He based his arguments on the principle of utilitarianism, the ethical view that an act is right insofar as it leads to the "greatest happiness of the greatest number," a phrase first used in 1776 by Jeremy Bentham in A Fragment on Government. Singer drew an explicit comparison between the liberation of women and of animals.

The moral status of animals…3 arguments