All Animals Are Equal, And Speciesism Analysis

Improved Essays
In comparison of “All Animals Are Equal and Moral Standing,” the “Value of Lives, and Speciesism” the key differences are based on the values outlined by the writers. In Value of Lives and Speciesism, Frey discusses the importance of animals feel pain and suffer just as humans do, but also admits that there are reasons such as necessary medical research for harming animals. On the other hand, Singer’s All Animals Are Equal focuses on the rights of hemostats in comparison to those who can make intelligent decisions. The question is should non-human animals have rights and how far do those rights reach? Both agree that animals should have rights, but their major differences including, pleasure and pain, hierarchy, consumption, and richness of life. …show more content…
He explains that “[equality is] an unjustifiable demand” (173), because everyone has “differing capacities of pleasure and pain” (173) along with many other differences. Not to say that equality should not exist, but to say that all intelligent beings should have rights for no reasons besides that it is right. Frey, in contrast, believes that pain and suffering are the primary reasons for equality. All animals feel pain and therefore, should have the right to live as equals. His exception of animal testing allows for harm to non-human animals as long as it creates better than harm. Focusing on the harm principal is very utilitarian of Frey, but lacks the extension of rights that Singer discusses. Singers usage of the basic principle of equality allows rights to all sentient beings no matter how many live it would improve. By focusing on the idea that everyone has the basic right to equality even if the individual cannot feel pain. This corrects the issue that arises when an individual either cannot feel physical or emotional pain.

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In his essay Animal Liberation, Peter Singer advocates for a basic principle of equality, regardless of differences between humans and non-humans. When postulating this approach, Singer compares the suffering of historically oppressed people such as African Americans and Women to that of animals today. To expand, Singer advocates for a liberation movement for animals, a movement that will help us explore our moral horizons, then leading us to acknowledge unethical and unjustifiable practices. Basically, what was once regarded as natural, will now be seen as unjustifiable prejudice (Singer Pg. 802)…

    • 363 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Payton White Professor Hunsaker 3 September 2016 Articles 26 & 27 After analyzing article 26, “Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases” by Alastair Norcross, a couple things become apparent. Such as (only use “such as” if you are continuing the sentence, but not to start a new sentence.) our author opening up his piece with a fictional scenario that seems a tad bit crazy, but serves as a very serious philosophical point. According to our ( it would be best to just say, “the” author instead of “our” author.) author, Norcross sees meat-eaters-at least those who know of the treatment of factory-farmed animals-are completely at fault for the consumption of meat.…

    • 1262 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the article “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights”, author Abby Hearne states that the current animal rights movement is “built upon a misconceived premise that rights were created to prevent us from unnecessary suffering.” This mixed with the misunderstanding of animal happiness and what it really means. This paper is written for people who are supporters of the current animal rights movement. The author Abby Hearne’s main argument in this essay is that our definition of animal rights is fundamentally wrong.…

    • 810 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There is no doubting the fact that animals do not have rights in the conventional sense, or in any other sense for that matter. The reason is because they are not moral agents; they cannot do things out of a sense of right or wrong and cannot reason, as opposed to humans. Without reasoning, they are unable to have rights and therefore, are not responsible. Does that mean humans have the right to treat animals badly? Of course not; but that is for humans to decide, because animals cannot decide anything.…

    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In his essay, “Speciesism and the Equality of Animals,” Peter Singer argues that the standard for having a right to get equal consideration as others is the species’ “capacity for suffering and enjoyment” (205), and therefore, a species which satisfies the standard should be protected from speciesism. Speciesism is “a prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species” (204). Singer states that many people’s voices arguing that intelligence cannot justify racism and sexism bring speciesism towards animals into…

    • 93 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Frey cites animals as having lesser value because of their lack of agency, however, the mere fact that animals cannot be moral agents does not exclude them from being moral patients. Humans need to exercise their agency, be morally responsible and give animals consideration because of their status as moral patients and their ability to suffer.3 This…

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Animal rights are the benefits that people give to animals. Benefits that people give from human use and abuse and the right to protection from human use and abuse and rights can take the moral, legal and practical forms. According to Rifkin 's article “ A change of heart about animals” there is evidence that animals do feel pain and love. For example, elephants moan when they lose a loved one, Koko knows sign language and understands bunch of words, pigs the react differently when they get what they want or when the allowed to play. And around the world and U.S people really don’t take these points into consideration.…

    • 826 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The animal rights movement declares that animals have the same right to life and protection from suffering, as well as any other creature that can feel pain. Doctor of Philosophy, Tom Regan, justifies animal rights from the standpoint of logic. In his article “The Radical Egalitarian Case for Animal Rights”, the author takes a firm stance on this issue and claims that almost all human relationships with animals have the exploitative nature. At the same time, animals have the right to meet the needs and the implementation of their natural purposes. Tom Regan 's argument can be formulated as follows non-human animals have an equal right to respect and treatment for them, which means that hurting them or using as a raw material or a kind of resource…

    • 899 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    On the article “A Change of Heart about Animals”, Jeremy Rifkin argues that animals should be treated humanely because, according to science, the differences between animals and humans are less than what we think. He believes that animals should be given the rights that protect them from inhumane treatment and human consumption. He is telling us that we have to give them the same rights that a human possesses. In affirmation to Jeremy Rifkin, we should treat animals humanely because they also have a heart that can feel pain and a brain that can think.…

    • 773 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Bryan Cruz Ms. Jacobs ERWC Period 4 October 5 2015 Animal Rights Over the years of humankind, humans have always treated animals badly because people think of animals lower than them, but it has been shown that they’re much different than us and even Jeremy Rifkin explains that in “A Change of Hearts about Animals”. Animals are more like people than they first thought and should see why. It has been proven that animals have emotions like us and feel sad or happy. Animals also have shown their intelligence in tests that has changed our views in how they solve problems. They also have to be taught things that they never knew, just like humans.…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the essay “An Argument for Animalism” by Eric T. Olson, he concludes that personal identity is psychological continuity. I will disagree with Olson’s ideas about personal identity in the brain-transplant and the thinking-animal argument. The main point of the paper is about animalism. Olson’s argument is that each one of us is numerically identical to a human animal. Olson says that a person could exist who is not numerically identical to any animal, but it’s not the case for you and I. Olson, then presents his ‘Thinking-Animal Argument’ and the alternatives to that.…

    • 1160 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In All Animals Are Equal, the philosopher Peter Singer argues that we should extend the basic principle of equality to non-human animals. In order to justify this claim, the author examines the foundations of the basic principle of equality, establishing a moral system that takes into account the equal consideration of interests of living beings. Peter Singer states that in order for a being to have interests at all, one must take into account the capacity of suffering and enjoyment, or in other words, sentience. Throughout this chapter, Singer makes his readers see that if one rejects racism and sexism, one must also reject the idea of giving special consideration to the interests of one species over another one. In this essay, I will firstly reconstruct the arguments used by Singer to arrive at the conclusion that all animals are equal.…

    • 905 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Animal’s Capabilities In Bonnie Steinbock’s “Speciesism and the Idea of Equality” she provides arguments against those of Peter Singers in his article “All Animals are Equal.” Steinbock argues that non-human animals should have specifics rights. She didn’t go as far as saying that they should have the right to vote or marry, but the right to be recognized as coherent beings just as capable of suffering and feeling as we are. The way that I see it, Steinbock provides some valid points but fails to acknowledge the quantity of animals in our world, and that there are some animals that we don’t care if they suffer.…

    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Student Course Date Singer’s Principle of Equal Consideration of Interest In his seminal work, Animal Liberation, Peter Singer, puts forth the principle of equal consideration of interest in which he argues that for any being that possesses interests, those interests must be considered to be correspondingly morally significant with the identical interests of another being. Singer applies this principle to all sentient beings and uses sentience as the crucial characteristic for admissibility into the moral society (Singer 57). Singer’s argument has been challenged numerous times, this one by Francis and Norman.…

    • 988 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    This essay’s objective is to present both sides of the issue, allowing the reader to further investigate and form their own ethical stance for or against animal rights. For many, it is…

    • 1264 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays