Animal Liberation Peter Singer Summary

Improved Essays
Introduction
Singer is right to claim that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. (16)

Exposition
In his writing, Animal Liberation, Peter Singer maintains that we ought to give equal consideration to the lives of non-human animals as we do to the lives of humans. He is saying that all animals, either human or non-human are all equal. One of the arguments that Singer says is asking why equality is a moral idea and not a declaration of fact. He does this by working through the problems of assertions made in justifications of racism, sexism and equality of all humans. He gives us his explanations by going through the reasons as to why racism and sexism are wrong. Since all humans are different like our race,
…show more content…
Even if this means experimenting on animals so that we can fight and find cures for diseases, then this takes priority over animal suffering. Research on animals can help people to enrich their knowledge about phenomenons that happen on earth. It might seem as an inhuman act, but these experiments can save thousands of human lives. Instead of saving a life of one animal, it is better to save thousands of human lives. Therefore it is more rational to save more lives than one. Some animals are needed by humans to assist them in producing and providing foods. In many countries, cows or horses are used by farmers to cultivate their farming areas, and other diary farms such as chicken and sheep are slaughtered for their meats. Without the existence of these animals, there would be a humanity issue about the lack of food supplies and starvation for mankind. …show more content…
Some would say animals deserve better. They don’t deserve to be treated the way they are because animals are living creatures just like humans. They don’t need to be tortured or exploited by humans because we feel superior than them. Animals were made on earth just like us. There are other ways we can benefit from animals without making them suffer and go through pain because of us. Others might say the opposite. We need to exploit animals to ensure human survival.

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Although humans have evolved to the point where we can devote some attention to honoring the animals that help us build our society, we should not degenerate our society to account for their feelings. One such story of degeneration is of Kevin Martin, a man whose research of AIDS medication was halted by the Swiss Health Department on account of an ethic review that had already been approved by other organizations.(Yong 39) Another example are animals farmed for meat consumption. Although ultimately, they are born just to die, they aren't killed for the sake of killing; They are killed to aid human society. As callous as it sounds, animals having more rights would work to stagnate human progress due to extra regulations both legally and…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer begins his argument on Famine, Affluence, and Morality with heart wrenching facts and statements about disasters happening all over the world but more specifically, East Bengal. He claims people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. The relentless poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war turned at least nine million people into refugees. Singer further explains that the richer nations have enough money to completely fix this issue and still have a surplus of cash in the bank. He calls the same attention to the individual level as well; he states with the exception of a select few, the mass majority of individuals do not morally feel responsible to help the situation in any significant way.…

    • 1077 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In his essay, “Speciesism and the Equality of Animals,” Peter Singer argues that the standard for having a right to get equal consideration as others is the species’ “capacity for suffering and enjoyment” (205), and therefore, a species which satisfies the standard should be protected from speciesism. Speciesism is “a prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species” (204). Singer states that many people’s voices arguing that intelligence cannot justify racism and sexism bring speciesism towards animals into…

    • 93 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    We should be saving animals too. As stated before there should be an in between. I think it is possible to find a way to get the information needed from testing the animals but not hurting them. If some scientists…

    • 571 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In other words, we would not negate any service to another person that is not literally equal to ourselves. Everyone has different biological traits whether it be skin tone, sexuality, or mental capacity yet we all see each other as equal human beings, why can't animals be a part of that? It is important to note that Singer does not want the same right for animals as humans but that it would depend on the animal itself the same way men don't have the right to an abortion because they physically don't have the ability to have one. This extension of equality to other animals in Singer's eyes is seen as the moral obligation that we as animals…

    • 848 Words
    • 4 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
  • Decent Essays

    Animals should have rights for many reasons since they’re so much like humans. Animals have proved that…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Peter Singer Analysis

    • 1509 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Many would agree that murder is the most morally atrocious and impermissible thing that an autonomous being can commit. As well, many would agree that there is a certain moral obligation that everyone should have to their fellow man, and hence feel some obligation to help prevent the suffering of a fellow man if the opportunity presents itself. However, how far does that obligation stretch? Does it go beyond the bounds of only being morally responsible for the circumstances that you can see in front of you? Or are people in a way just as much responsible for all the suffering throughout the world that we have the capability to help prevent; such as the suffering of the global poor.…

    • 1509 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In comparison of “All Animals Are Equal and Moral Standing,” the “Value of Lives, and Speciesism” the key differences are based on the values outlined by the writers. In Value of Lives and Speciesism, Frey discusses the importance of animals feel pain and suffer just as humans do, but also admits that there are reasons such as necessary medical research for harming animals. On the other hand, Singer’s All Animals Are Equal focuses on the rights of hemostats in comparison to those who can make intelligent decisions. The question is should non-human animals have rights and how far do those rights reach? Both agree that animals should have rights, but their major differences including, pleasure and pain, hierarchy, consumption, and richness of life.…

    • 1155 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Peter Singer ultimately believes that we are morally obligated to help those who need help and are suffering. He provides various arguments that support his belief that everyone should help the dying people of East Bengal. He starts off by assuming one thing, “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad.” This assumption serves as a foundation for his many claims since it provides a definition for what he considers bad. Furthermore, his first claim is that we are morally obligated to stop bad things from happening only if we do not have to sacrifice something of equal value.…

    • 2138 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For many years, humans have questioned the existence of animals. Animals have provided us with many needs such as entertainment and food, but are they really here to serve the human race? Many people argue that they are for it is the "circle of life". Animals eat other animals such as in the short story "Living like Weasels" by Annie Dillard. It discussed how weasels prey off of birds, rabbits, and mice.…

    • 1148 Words
    • 5 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

    If animals are individuals, then using them to benefit humans at their expense would be to treat them as means to an end, and would thus violate their rights as…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the environment, there is necessary suffering that needs to exist to preserve the biotic community. The land ethicist brings up an important concept of a keystone species which exemplify the need for keeping species even if it involves killing sentient beings. The keystone species life takes priority on the scale of importance this conflicts with animal liberationists again. Peter Singer would put the importance of cognitive ability over how important a being is to the environment. For instance, a human being would be valued higher than an otter.…

    • 1062 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    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.…

    • 988 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays