The title of McPhersons work is ‘Why I am a Vegan’ which relates the majority of the work to why killing animals and using their products is wrong. That being said, I would assume almost anyone would find it troubling if someone thought it was ok to kill other humans; this is because humans have rights that animals do not. We have a duty to animals to treat them justly and humanly but they don’t have rights equivalent to ours. McPherson relates his examples to humans so we would be able to relate to the examples and be able to have perspective, however it doesn’t work in this argument. McPherson states that “killing typically interferes dramatically with the victim’s autonomy” yes this is true for humans and it is also true for animals (McPherson 5). He also states “it can be wrong to deprive a person of a valuable future” again this is true for humans and animals even though they can’t perceive or value it (McPherson 6). Where the problem arises is the fact that humans and animals are inherently different. Humans have a vastly different and more complex idea of autonomy and also a greater sense of their future. This being so it puts humans on a separate level than animals. We as humans don’t necessarily look at ourselves on equal standing with the squirrel running across the road trying to avoid oncoming traffic. Over hundreds of years the human species has evolved and taken control of the lesser species, distancing ourselves from them as a result. The relation to humans also fails because being human we value other humans lives more than any other lifeform. This is because they are our own kind, people generally value the lives of their own family members over a stranger’s, humans valuing humans is just on a much larger scale. For example, if someone had a gun to the head of your mom and a complete stranger and unfortunately one had to die most people
The title of McPhersons work is ‘Why I am a Vegan’ which relates the majority of the work to why killing animals and using their products is wrong. That being said, I would assume almost anyone would find it troubling if someone thought it was ok to kill other humans; this is because humans have rights that animals do not. We have a duty to animals to treat them justly and humanly but they don’t have rights equivalent to ours. McPherson relates his examples to humans so we would be able to relate to the examples and be able to have perspective, however it doesn’t work in this argument. McPherson states that “killing typically interferes dramatically with the victim’s autonomy” yes this is true for humans and it is also true for animals (McPherson 5). He also states “it can be wrong to deprive a person of a valuable future” again this is true for humans and animals even though they can’t perceive or value it (McPherson 6). Where the problem arises is the fact that humans and animals are inherently different. Humans have a vastly different and more complex idea of autonomy and also a greater sense of their future. This being so it puts humans on a separate level than animals. We as humans don’t necessarily look at ourselves on equal standing with the squirrel running across the road trying to avoid oncoming traffic. Over hundreds of years the human species has evolved and taken control of the lesser species, distancing ourselves from them as a result. The relation to humans also fails because being human we value other humans lives more than any other lifeform. This is because they are our own kind, people generally value the lives of their own family members over a stranger’s, humans valuing humans is just on a much larger scale. For example, if someone had a gun to the head of your mom and a complete stranger and unfortunately one had to die most people