Student
Course
Date
Singer’s Principle of Equal Consideration of Interest
In his seminal work, Animal Liberation, Peter Singer, puts forth the principle of equal consideration of interest in which he argues that for any being that possesses interests, those interests must be considered to be correspondingly morally significant with the identical interests of another being. Singer applies this principle to all sentient beings and uses sentience as the crucial characteristic for admissibility into the moral society (Singer 57). Singer’s argument has been challenged numerous times, this one by Francis and Norman. In their argument, Francis and Norman reject Singer’s principle, arguing that humans may give human interests greater consideration than comparable animal interest (Francis and Norman 507). Francis and Norman agree that animal interests deserve some consideration, but they argue that it is ethically correct for humans to give human interests more weight than similar animal interests. They base their argument on the premise that all and only creatures with the ability to form plans for the non-immediate future deserve equal consideration of their interests. This essay supports the stance adopted by Francis and Norman, contending that individuals only bear moral responsibilities to some animals more then others, they are ethically right in according more weight to human interests in comparison to those of animals.
Singer bases his argument on four main …show more content…
'Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others '. Philosophy 53.206 (1978): 507. Web. 29 November 2015.
Hursthouse, Rosalind. Ethics, Humans And Other Animals: An Introduction With Readings. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.
Singer, Peter. Writings On An Ethical Life. New York: Ecco Press, 2000. Print.
Singer, Peter. 'Animal Liberation '. Animal Rights: The Changing Debate. Robert Gamer. 1st ed. London: MacMillan Press Ltd, 1996.
Course
Date
Singer’s Principle of Equal Consideration of Interest
In his seminal work, Animal Liberation, Peter Singer, puts forth the principle of equal consideration of interest in which he argues that for any being that possesses interests, those interests must be considered to be correspondingly morally significant with the identical interests of another being. Singer applies this principle to all sentient beings and uses sentience as the crucial characteristic for admissibility into the moral society (Singer 57). Singer’s argument has been challenged numerous times, this one by Francis and Norman. In their argument, Francis and Norman reject Singer’s principle, arguing that humans may give human interests greater consideration than comparable animal interest (Francis and Norman 507). Francis and Norman agree that animal interests deserve some consideration, but they argue that it is ethically correct for humans to give human interests more weight than similar animal interests. They base their argument on the premise that all and only creatures with the ability to form plans for the non-immediate future deserve equal consideration of their interests. This essay supports the stance adopted by Francis and Norman, contending that individuals only bear moral responsibilities to some animals more then others, they are ethically right in according more weight to human interests in comparison to those of animals.
Singer bases his argument on four main …show more content…
'Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others '. Philosophy 53.206 (1978): 507. Web. 29 November 2015.
Hursthouse, Rosalind. Ethics, Humans And Other Animals: An Introduction With Readings. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.
Singer, Peter. Writings On An Ethical Life. New York: Ecco Press, 2000. Print.
Singer, Peter. 'Animal Liberation '. Animal Rights: The Changing Debate. Robert Gamer. 1st ed. London: MacMillan Press Ltd, 1996.