Human Suffering And Animal Suffering Should Be Given Equal Consideration

1743 Words Dec 19th, 2015 null Page
More than 150 billion animals are slaughtered each year. Compare that to the 13,000 people that were murdered just last year. Now obviously it is not feasible to take those two statistics into consideration when talking about the feelings of animals. But philosopher Peter Singer is right to claim that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. Australian philosopher, Peter Singer, starts off his argument by comparing the ethics behind women’s rights to that of animal rights. His retribution is that if the argument for equality was sound when applied to women, why should it not be applied to animals also? Now you might be wondering how this is a valid argument. But keep in mind that before 1920 women were not considered equal to men, in a sense, being not that much higher up than animals in the patriarchal society. The same thing goes for African Americans as well. In fact, it was a common belief of ignorant bigots of the time that Blacks were direct relatives of apes. Singer quickly refutes this argument by stating that a person’s sex is no guide to his or her abilities, thus why it is unjustifiable to discriminate on the basis of sex. We will later delve in on whether or not animals suffer as much as humans as well.
Now that we agree that we move on past the differences between human and animals, we must look at what makes animals and humans different intellectually. Humans clearly have the upper hand in that they have their education…

Related Documents