Animal Equality
This assertion is saying that there are differences between animals and humans and because of those differences we should have different rights. Humans already have more rights than animals and it is ridiculous how no one even recognizes it. For example, humans go hunting all the time and don't even think twice about it. What I am saying is, on the news you never hear about a deer killing a hunter because it just doesn't happen. It is not the deer's nature to kill a human when we have done nothing wrong to it. And the same should work both ways for humans as it does for animals. When animals have done nothing wrong to us, there is no need for us to grab a gun and just go shooting and murdering innocent animals. I believe that humans and animals should have the same rights to an extent, but not to the point where it is out of control. As of right now, humans have so many more rights than animals. You have to stay within limits when you are talking about humans and animal rights. You can't say that animals should get to vote or anything like that because it is absurd. But you can say that humans can't kill deer without justifiable cause. Guthrie claims it is impractical to look beyond the human community meaning that
Singer makes a good point when he says that the argument for equality was applied to women, and it is the same situation for animals. They were treated as if they were lower than humans and eventually they got equal rights to an extent. Almost everyone treats their pets as if they were lower than they are. They always talk down to them and scold them and in the days when women were treated this way they wouldn't say anything about it, and that is how it is with animals now because they can't say anything about it. At some point in time, women got equal rights to man and it is the same case as dogs being treated as lower than humans and I feel that soon they will get equal treatment as humans do. A counterexample to this, which Guthrie would probably use, is that women have the ability to vote because they can think and make rational decisions, but animals on the other hand cannot. And in favor of the animals, Singer would say that some of the decisions that the animals have no say in affect them but they can do nothing about it. So that example is irrelevant when you look deeper into it if the situation that could have affects the animals. On the other hand to both of these arguments, Thomas Taylor would say that these examples that are listed above have no relevance because dogs and cats will never have the chance to vote so we should not even bother pondering about whether animals should have equal rights to humans. Taylor also gives the example that the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment but rather equal consideration. If we give equal consideration, then this may lead to different rights and treatment. simultaneously leads us into what is known as Schweitzer's dilemma. Schweitzer considered each organism as an individual who at all costs would be saved under all causes if at all possible. Schweitzer states that predators are regarded as evil. If this statement were true, then wouldn't humans be evil because we hunt and are predators against deer and rabbits and all kinds of animals in the wild. We go hunting them for no cause at all except for the fun of it, which would mean we are predators. Not only do we face absurd decisions about which organisms we save in a crisis situation, but the question can also be posed as to how individual variation within each species is to be regarded. If we consider out morality as an entirely human phenomenon, and apply it to humans, the system will work and we don't have to worry about other organisms except for ourselves. Guthrie states that it is illogical and impractical to extend any kind of feelings past humanity. Our relationship to any organism but us is useless unless we need that resource and in that case it is all right. It seems like he is contradicting himself in that statement when he says we shouldn't express any moral concern past ourselves, but then when we need anything outside of our own resources it is fine if we utilize other materials than those we have. His opinion is that we shouldn't weigh the effect that our actions have on organisms other than ourselves when we are deciding what to do which is v
Some common words found in the essay are:
, Thomas Taylor, Rene Descartes, equal rights, rights humans, feel pain, animals rights, living breathing, rights animals, humans animals, equal consideration, rights extent, equal rights humans, humans rights animals, animal rights, animals equal rights, murdering innocent animals, treated lower humans,
Approximate Word count = 2123
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)
|