Is animal testing morally justified?
In the era of science and technology, human has an ever-increasing living standard . As such, numerous products have been created to meet our constantly generating demands in different aspect of lives. In order to examine the quality of the products, animal testing are widely applied in multiple industries, and it seems that animal testing is inevitable for the sake of human.
In definition, “animal testing” refers to the procedures which performed on living animals for various purposes of testing the human health and/or environmental safety of new products, assessing the effects of new products, and scientific research into biology and diseases. According to the Humane Society International, animals that …show more content…
I will attempt to argue on the basis of subject-of-life view and virtue ethics, and prove that animal testing is morally unjustified and should be stopped as soon as possible for the sake of …show more content…
Tom Regan has proposed the subject-of-life view in which animals have a basic moral right to be treated with respect. This view aims defending the issue of ‘animals rights’ and opposing any kind of animal experimentation. As animals are enjoying their basic rights, it is logical that they should not be treated with enforced feeding, inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, so on so forth. People may argue that animals have rights but not equal rights as human, so that animals should be chosen first in tests. However, animals do have the right to be respected in disregard of the fact that animals may not necessarily enjoy the same right as human. So it is immoral to allow animals to be utilized as mere means in animal experimentation. According to Regan, the only explainable reason for an individual to undergo painful experiments would be to benefit these very same individual, or through their own will. For example, this would justify performing therapeutic procedures in animals, as well as in children and people with disabilities that cannot express their consent. So experimentation aiming in testifying products is in no way
In the era of science and technology, human has an ever-increasing living standard . As such, numerous products have been created to meet our constantly generating demands in different aspect of lives. In order to examine the quality of the products, animal testing are widely applied in multiple industries, and it seems that animal testing is inevitable for the sake of human.
In definition, “animal testing” refers to the procedures which performed on living animals for various purposes of testing the human health and/or environmental safety of new products, assessing the effects of new products, and scientific research into biology and diseases. According to the Humane Society International, animals that …show more content…
I will attempt to argue on the basis of subject-of-life view and virtue ethics, and prove that animal testing is morally unjustified and should be stopped as soon as possible for the sake of …show more content…
Tom Regan has proposed the subject-of-life view in which animals have a basic moral right to be treated with respect. This view aims defending the issue of ‘animals rights’ and opposing any kind of animal experimentation. As animals are enjoying their basic rights, it is logical that they should not be treated with enforced feeding, inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, so on so forth. People may argue that animals have rights but not equal rights as human, so that animals should be chosen first in tests. However, animals do have the right to be respected in disregard of the fact that animals may not necessarily enjoy the same right as human. So it is immoral to allow animals to be utilized as mere means in animal experimentation. According to Regan, the only explainable reason for an individual to undergo painful experiments would be to benefit these very same individual, or through their own will. For example, this would justify performing therapeutic procedures in animals, as well as in children and people with disabilities that cannot express their consent. So experimentation aiming in testifying products is in no way