Peter Singer's Argument Against Speciesism

Great Essays
All for One? Or One for All?
Introduction.
In this paper, I will be taking on Peter Singer’s argument against speciesism. I will be doing this by first presenting his argument in Section I, then follow up with clarifying any words that need to be disambiguated. Section II will consist of my objection to this point in effort to counter it. Section III will include a possible response Singer would give for this raised objection. My main argument for Singer’s argument against speciesism considers the order of nature.
Section I.
In his argument, Singer explains why it is he believes that humans and nonhumans should be treated equally. This is my interpretation of Singer’s argument against speciesism in premise-conclusion form:
1. Speciesism divides humans from nonhumans
2. Both humans and certain nonhumans have been found to feel pleasure and suffering
3. Beings that experience pleasure and suffering should be
…show more content…
As the species that currently reigns “dominion” over the other species, we act as “trustees” to them on the global stage to act on their behalf. Whether the choices we make are the right ones, that is another issue altogether.
Conclusion:
In this paper, I have considered Peter Singer’s arguments on the wrongness of speciesism by explaining his points and moving forward to presenting my best argument against it. Speciesism is not only a factor of the human species, but within and in between other species as well. But consider this, are we the only ones to be able to cognitively decipher the wrongness of speciesism? To repeat my main argument, humans are the only ones capable of deep cognitive thought and are guided by more than instinct, but a moral compass. Speciesism is a natural part of interactions between species and it gives order to nature.

Word Count:

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    However, I felt that Gould was little harsh to the creationist by his writing style and some choice of words but the constant adding of creationist views and explanation on the theory was needed to prove that there is more logic in the evolution theory over the religious belief. Everyone should believe in religion but not blindly that you start calling it science without no facts to support it. Religion and science should be kept away from each other and religion should be there to learn the values and traditions rather than questioning the existence of science because if it gets out of hand then one day it will put stop to all new discoveries made by scientist. Throughout his essay, Gould was trying to portray that, “We must infer them from results that still surround us: living and fossil organisms for evolution, documents and artifacts for human history”, which is spot-on because the world runs on proofs than on your opinions (Gould, 255). Gould’s presentation of evidences and his disagreement towards the creationist is very logical and written in a straightforward manner for the audience to know that there is more creditability of Darwin’s theory than the creationist…

    • 1002 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The moral dilemma shown here, is the same one that Singer believes occurs every time an American who already owns a TV chooses to go out and buy a new one. Instead of using this excess money to upgrade their television, they should be donating it to prevent the deaths of kids in need. Even though these two decision both have different factors to them, they both could lead to the same result. Except, in one scenario a kid dies by being sold to an organ peddler, and in the other a child dies of hunger on the street.…

    • 348 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Essay-2 CHALLENGE FROM MARGINAL CASES Having gone through the ‘Challenge from Marginal Cases: in the Article “Puppies, Pigs and People”, it seems the author Alastair Norcross is of the view that any mutilation or torture to non-human animals is morally impermissible irrespective of the actions of Fred’s behavior and torture of the animals or slaughtering or mutilation of farmed animals. He argues that there is no difference as the animal is mutilated in either case. In one case Fred tortures his puppies directly to obtain cocoamone for his pleasure whereas in other case farmed animals are slaughtered to cater the need of the people. From the above I feel, Fred is a rare consumer of cocoamone and the way he treats or torture puppies himself in an unorganized way and keep animal…

    • 1125 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Case: Omi And Winant

    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Arguments over creation took place and many wondered whether God had created only one “species” of humanity…

    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “Herzog, Hal. ‘Some We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat: Why it’s so hard to think Straight about Animals”. New York, NY, Harper Perennial, 2010. Hal Herzog focuses on the ethically inconsistent views that prevail in commonly held attitudes toward animals. The author suggests that moral incoherence is hardwired into the thinking of our species as a random by-product of evolution.…

    • 1119 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In “Are All Species Equal?” author David Schmidtz provides the ability to maintain a respect for nature while rejecting species egalitarianism in biocentrism (58). Schmidtz’s point is that all species do not need to command the same respect in order for humans to show respect for other species: “We can have reasons to treat nonhuman species with respect, regardless of whether we consider them to be on a moral par with homo sapiens” (62). By disregarding characteristics that make certain species superior to others, biocentrism is an arbitrary classification (59). Giving superiority to certain species does not mean losing respect for other species, but it recognizes the difference in need and vulnerability of all species (60-61).…

    • 1463 Words
    • 6 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

    Payton White Professor Hunsaker 3 September 2016 Articles 26 & 27 After analyzing article 26, “Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases” by Alastair Norcross, a couple things become apparent. Such as (only use “such as” if you are continuing the sentence, but not to start a new sentence.) our author opening up his piece with a fictional scenario that seems a tad bit crazy, but serves as a very serious philosophical point. According to our ( it would be best to just say, “the” author instead of “our” author.) author, Norcross sees meat-eaters-at least those who know of the treatment of factory-farmed animals-are completely at fault for the consumption of meat.…

    • 1262 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Prolepsis Thesis

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Moving further, Pollen’s use of prolepsis makes his article more successful and persuasive. Pollen answers many objections that are anticipated from animal right activists, like Singer, which gives him credibility and a trustworthy personality from his audience. Such a notable moment is when Singer brings up the difference between severely retarded infants and chimpanzees. He notes: “If that scheme offends our sense of equality, then why is the fact that animals lack certain human characteristics any more just as a basis for discrimination?” (Pollan, 208).…

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this paper I will reconstruct Singer’s argument as well as argue why his argument is unsound. In Singer’s paper, Famine, Affluence and Morality, he argues that any kind of suffering from lack of food, healthcare and shelter is a bad thing. He further argues that if we have the ability to prevent something bad from happening, that it is our duty as moral beings to prevent suffering unless we have to sacrifice something of significant moral importance. In class we called it the prevent suffering principle. An example that Singer gives is of the prevent suffering principle is to imagine a young child drowning in a shallow pond.…

    • 815 Words
    • 4 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

    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 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
  • Great Essays

    The Contrast Between Animality and Humanity in The Island of Doctor Moreau and Life of Pi One of the major cultural anxieties that prevails in society is the relationship between humans and animals and the distinction between humanity and animality. Humans are often depicted as being a higher form of animal, most commonly induced by religious practices. However, upon isolation or fear of death, the human thought process tends to revert to what is associated to animal-like behaviour. Humans tend to separate themselves from animal life forms as animals are seen as vicious, brutish and capable of committing acts that humans refrain from. Because of this cultural anxiety, much of literature embodies the ideology of animality and humanity and the…

    • 1597 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great 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