Is Animal Rights Wrong

Improved Essays
Animal Rights- Is it wrong for human to eat animals?
Animal rights has been a debatable topic for a long time, and is it wrong for us, human, to eat animals is one of the controversial question. Many people, and philosoplers argue that animals should have their right, some of those ideas lead to the result of vegetarianism. Some of them point out that animals should have the same morality consideration since they are equal. Therefore, the right or wrong of eating their meat is worth discussing. In my opinion, I do not agree that it is morally wrong for human to eat animals. In this paper, I am going to study this question in different angle,including utilitarianism,denotology and the feasiability of not eating animals.

First, I am going to
…show more content…
The point of Singer is based on two premise. The first one is the main theory of utilitarianism, and the second one is the equality of consideration. Therefore, if one of the premise is false, his argument cannot be proved. I do not agree with his second premise because human and animals are totally different beings, they should not be considerd equally. Singer uses the example of sexism and racism as his reasons to support animals liberation, but they are totally different cases. Because women and black people are human, which is the same well-beings with male and white people, yet animals are different with that. According to Immanuel Kant,”animals are not self-conscious and are there merely as a means to an end. That end is man.Our duties towards animals are merely indirect duties towards humanity.”In other words, Kant suggests that animals should not enjoy the same right of human. Besides,according to Carl Coen, a professor of Philosophy at the Residential College, also points out that human have no duty to treat animals as human since they are not able to make moral decision and this is the requirment of being the member of moral society.And the similar idea can be found in Chinese Philosophy. According to Mencius,human is different with beasts since human have the possibility of become moral. It is found that many philosophers think that animals are different with human because they have no morality and self-conscious. Animals have no idea of having right and moral, so it is meaningless for them to have the right. Given a case that if animals have the same right of human, then we rre going to choose to sacrifice a human to save 10 fishes as the result of utilitarism. Obviously,this is not right. Some people may agrued that babies cannot make moral decision but it is wrong for us to torment them, therefore animals should also have the same right. But babies have the posibility of being moral

Related Documents

  • 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

    Imagine life without depending on any animals. For some it may be easy for instance a vegetarian but hard for the meat lovers. Animals do much more than just feeding us. They can find cures for diseases like cancer and AIDS. In the essay “The Evil of Animal Rights,” there is a group of people who disagree with animal testing.…

    • 571 Words
    • 3 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

    The case that animal suffering should be given equal consideration to that of human suffering is a claim Peter Singer makes and that I disagree with, instead arguing that human suffering should be more highly considered to that of animals. Exposition- 310 words Peter Singer in his argument claims that human suffering and animal suffering should be treated in the same manner, putting the lives of other animals in the same categories as those of humans. This argument begins by talking about how humans should be considered in the same group as animals, this is all due by part that we are all members of the animal kingdom, living in the same world, breathing the same air, and occupying the same space. The rights should be universally equal amongst all species.…

    • 1116 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Animal Rights Did you know that some animals on earth are being more and more abused because of animal cruelty? Around 900-2000 animals are abused every year. In 2007 1880 animals were being abused. 64.5% (1212) Involved dogs.…

    • 444 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    Animal Rights

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Medical progress rarely occurs without raising ethical issues. These issues are not limited to the use of emerging technologies or human subjects, but extend to the use of non-human animals in medical research. While there is growing concern about the use of animals in research, it seems that supporters and critics of animal rights have focused on the wrong question. That is, whether it is ethically justifiable to use animals as subjects in research if they experience human-like qualities such as pain. Instead of arguing for the affirmative or negative for this question, I focus my attention on whether the question matters.…

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cohen’s principle argument on his position on animals is that humans are morally autonomous whereas animals are not. What Cohen means by this is that humans are able to make moral choices and animals are not able to make their own moral choices or respond to moral claims. Due to the inability of animals to judge morality, they do not have rights, and thus the reason that they should not have any rights either. To illustrate this, Cohen provided an example about his dog. Many humans have obligations, and in this example Cohen’s obligation is to take his dog to the vet and take it on walks, because the dog is not able to take itself to the vet or have the right to do its daily exercise on his or her own.…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Persuasive Animal Essay For centuries man has always had the upper hand over animals but animal activists are now trying to sway the argument to prove that animals should be treated at the same standard as humans. Activists are working hard to show that all animals, from the smallest fish to the largest elephant, can feel pain, emotions, and human connections. After reading the articles I have concluded that an animal bill of rights should be added the the United States Government. I believe that this Bill of rights should provide standards and regulations to how animals are kept and cared for, It should also cover laws of what humans should and should not be allowed to to to animals, for example, slaughterhouses versus bull fighting, and finally the bill of rights should not state nor infer that animals should not be treated with the same standard or be “legally declared a person”(Yong 38).…

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Humans are omnivores, which means that they eat both plants and animals. Ultimately, the human can decide whether or not they are going to consume animal meat. I am analyzing the article “Against Meat” in the They Say I say collection of articles. Jonathan Safran Foer talks about his experiences with his struggles of becoming a vegetarian.…

    • 1034 Words
    • 4 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

    In fact, the widespread belief that farming conditions should change or that humans should avoid meat would negatively impact the economy. In the article, “Is there a moral case for meat?”, Nathanael Johnson splits his essay into two parts. In the first part of the article, Johnson tries to find a logical counter…

    • 1085 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In his essay All Animals Are Equal Peter Singer argues that non-human animals are equal to humans. He believes that the next major liberation movement will be the one to end speciesism, which he defines as the discrimination against animals by humans. I will be arguing that the case Singer puts forward is persuasive, and provides a simple and easy solution to end speciesism by using logic and appealing to human emotion. Singer highlights a few main examples of speciesism in our society, the first and foremost being the meat industry.…

    • 967 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the major theories in philosophy is utilitarianism, which strives for producing the most amount of happiness. The utilitarian approach is based on the simple doctrine that if an action is ethical and it brings happiness to an individual or a group of people without causing pain, then it is acceptable. One of the main emphasis of utilitarianism is animal rights. It primarily focuses on the treatment of animals and how they should be treated more humanely. The paper will discuss utilitarian’s beliefs and whether they require people to stop eating animals and experimenting on them.…

    • 1122 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    One of the arguments is that some people thought that human and animals are different because human can question their action, but animals cannot. Therefore, animals do not have intrinsic worth or rights. Another one is that humans are clever and rational, but animals are not. Therefore, human have the right to use animals as food. Apart from animals, baby, comatose and mentally disabled persons are also not to be able to interrogate their action and do not have any rational mind.…

    • 1725 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Ethics, Humans And Other Animals: An Introduction With Readings. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print. Singer, Peter. Writings On An Ethical Life.…

    • 988 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays