Analysis Of An Animal's Place By Peter Singer

Improved Essays
In today’s society, humans have many expectations to live up to, to be considered as a decent human being. But, what’s the point of having all these expectations when most of us fail to live up to them? “What Should a Billionaire Give - and What Should You?” by Peter Singer is a story that discusses the obligations that Billionaires should have when it comes to the people less fortunate than them. “An Animal’s Place” by Michael Pollan is a story discussing that the reasons animals are so mistreated today is because we lost everyday contact with them. “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell is a story about George debating if he should shoot an escaped elephant or not. He solely makes this decision based on his pride. All of these stories have …show more content…
Everyone wants to live the happiest and best life they could live and do not want to be treated badly. As a result, ethical standards shows that we should all treat each other with love, sympathy, and kindness. Since humans don’t share the world for themselves, it is safe to assume that animals share these same values as we all co-exist. In “An Animal’s Place” Pollan talks about how animals and humans have the same interests. He says, “And the one all important interest that we share with pigs, as with all sentient creatures, is an interest in avoiding pain.” (400-401) This shows that there is a need for ethical standards because we all share them. As a result, we should be treating animals alike with the same kind of respect. Acknowledging that other animals feel the same things humans do, make us want to make a difference and become better people. Despite, many people not acknowledging them, it shows other people that we all have common values. Orwell also agrees that animals have common values. When Orwell shot an elephant, it was feeling too much pain so he decided to end his pain. He said, “It seemed dreadful to see the great beast lying there, powerless to move and yet powerless to die, and not even to be able to finish him.” (441) Orwell thought it was too cruel to let the animal die for a long period of time in pain so he decided to end his suffering. This leads back to the point that humans and animals have common ethical values which one of them is avoiding pain. Having ethical standards can help you put yourself in someone else’s shoes and make the right decision whether what to say or do. Regardless of many people living up to these standards, it is important to know that there are indeed “good” people out there and others can follow in their footstep. This shows that we are all not so different after

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In the article, “A change of Hearts about Animals,” by Jeremy Rifkin, he argues that the new findings by scientists show that animals are more similar to humans than we thought. In these findings we see that animals have emotion like they feel pain, get stressed, get happy and feel love like humans do. To support his claim he explains that there are studies that suggest that animals can acquire language skills, use tools, show self-awareness and pass on knowledge to the next generation. Through stating that animals are more like humans he wants humans to treat animals better.…

    • 370 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Chapter 4 of The Storytelling Animal is rather simple to digest. It follows the formula set forth by previous chapter, so the argument follows the same structure. It begins with a narrative to hook the reader, argues both sides of various topics around the subject, and concludes that the subject is a form a storytelling that helps us practice or prepare for real life problems. In chapter 4, the subject in hand is dreams. Interestingly, in this chapter, the primary argument is split into two different places.…

    • 818 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
  • 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

    Say that a dog is killed in a hit-and-run incident; the car runs the poor animal over and soon flees the scene without any care about the animal laying lifelessly on the street—an animal that could have belonged to a loving family who treated the animal as a family member. In a situation like that—we as humans have a moral obligation to pull off to the side of the road and make sure that the animal is okay or to call the owners and inform them of what has happened to their pet but instead we walk away when an animal feels pain or is injured. The reason why things like this happen is because it is basic human nature to see non-human organisms as lesser beings and we, as a whole, tend to feel entirely superior to those who are not as intelligent or complex. The lack of concern for how we test, mistreat and abuse these animals’ cause a lot of issues for those who work towards getting animals equal rights.…

    • 665 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He does not initially intend on killing the animal, but anti-imperialism and the pressure of the crowd really get to him. Orwell states that the only reason he shot and killed the beast was to avoid looking like a fool which, in the end, caused the author to be thankful that the man was killed because it gave him a reason to shoot at the elephant and he would not get in trouble with the authority. George Orwell uses detailed description of how the people are reacting to effectively show readers how peer pressure can affect people in positions of power. Although Orwell struggled…

    • 1065 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved 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 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.…

    • 1155 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In George Orwell’s novel, Animal Farm, he proves that it is inevitable for humans to equate everyone. Orwell explains this by his story which is about a group of farm animals that rebel against their farmer. After he gets kicked out, Napoleon, a pig, takes power and corrupts the farm. His power gets to the point where they were better off with the farmer, Mr. Jones. Orwell also illustrates how it is human nature to make mistakes and take control of power.…

    • 684 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    They are able to feel pain just as us humans do, thus, making it immoral to treat them critically. This theory positively promotes the awareness of animal rights and welfare. We ought to consider the animals needs before concluding our own happiness as they are the ones that…

    • 1122 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is wrong to mistreat animals because mistreating animals is like mistreating another human being. Animals feel pain the same way humans feel pain. They are living beings and bleed like humans bleed. This alone isn’t what distinguishes animals from having or not having rights. Animals do have rights to a certain extent.…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Animal Welfare Essay

    • 818 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In the world today, people cannot do without animals because they have become an essential part of human existence to both vegetarians and meat eaters. Some animals serve as pet, and some serve as food, and others are used for sports and laboratory experiments. Although some animal activist advocates for animal rights, there are limits to that right because animals cannot be equal with human. They don’t have the intellectual ability that humans have to take responsibilities and control what happens around them. These animals are important in the society and the need to treat them with respect is paramount.…

    • 818 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Ethical Argument In Animal Welfare

    • 1672 Words
    • 7 Pages
    • 10 Works Cited

    " People and Animals, Kindness and Cruelty: Research Directions and Policy Implications. " Journal of Social Issues 65.3 (2009): 569-587. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO.…

    • 1672 Words
    • 7 Pages
    • 10 Works Cited
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Critique on ‘Shoot an Elephant’ In todays’ society, we are influenced by many peers. Even though many may say to ourselves, “I make my own decision, I am my own person, I will do what I think is right.” With that being said by most of us, are we really doing what ‘we’ think is right, or are our decisions being made being influenced by other individuals? It comes across that George Orwell’s essay reflects what many may go through today. The struggle to do what is morally right when an entire world persuades individuals, or gives a different vision of the opposite.…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays