Worldwide, 500 million animals are subjected to inhumane experiments in the name of scientific research (Linzey, 2013).
The practise of vivisection on innocent animals is immoral and causes unjustifiable pain and suffering.
Pro-argument
It is immoral to exploit animals for scientific research. Animals are innocent, vulnerable beings who cannot represent themselves or comprehend the harm inflicted on them through experimental research. The debate whether animals deserve moral consideration is a contentious topic, there needs to be clarity on what is the necessary criteria for which animals need to be considered in a morally relevant logic. Various people have stated non-humans have no moral status, therefore do not deserve moral consideration. To receive …show more content…
Dejectedly, for this exclusion to moral status select people and strong supporters of speciesism accept due to their superiority over animals is acceptable to exploit them. Experimental research inflicts inhumane acts of pain and suffering on animals. Inflicting pain and suffering on innocent animals should never be acceptable, even in to seek answers to medical issues. Peter Singer (1975), author of ‘Animal Liberation’ and preferences based utilitarian, has highlighted the field of Psychology as a significant supporter of inhumane experimental research on animals, all financially funded by the federal government. Singer also exposes the numerous examples of immoral research techniques inflicted on animals. Firstly, the experiments that examine the detrimental effects of newly developed drugs on behaviour. Secondly, the invasive manipulation of the brain on a conscious, as researcher’s term, animal model. Thirdly, subjecting animals to psychological suffering to cause high levels of stress, fear, anxiety and also sleep denial. These inhumane psychological tests are conditioning experiments, delivered to the
The practise of vivisection on innocent animals is immoral and causes unjustifiable pain and suffering.
Pro-argument
It is immoral to exploit animals for scientific research. Animals are innocent, vulnerable beings who cannot represent themselves or comprehend the harm inflicted on them through experimental research. The debate whether animals deserve moral consideration is a contentious topic, there needs to be clarity on what is the necessary criteria for which animals need to be considered in a morally relevant logic. Various people have stated non-humans have no moral status, therefore do not deserve moral consideration. To receive …show more content…
Dejectedly, for this exclusion to moral status select people and strong supporters of speciesism accept due to their superiority over animals is acceptable to exploit them. Experimental research inflicts inhumane acts of pain and suffering on animals. Inflicting pain and suffering on innocent animals should never be acceptable, even in to seek answers to medical issues. Peter Singer (1975), author of ‘Animal Liberation’ and preferences based utilitarian, has highlighted the field of Psychology as a significant supporter of inhumane experimental research on animals, all financially funded by the federal government. Singer also exposes the numerous examples of immoral research techniques inflicted on animals. Firstly, the experiments that examine the detrimental effects of newly developed drugs on behaviour. Secondly, the invasive manipulation of the brain on a conscious, as researcher’s term, animal model. Thirdly, subjecting animals to psychological suffering to cause high levels of stress, fear, anxiety and also sleep denial. These inhumane psychological tests are conditioning experiments, delivered to the