Animal Liberation
Animal liberation is a viewpoint of which humans can view the relationship and interactions they hold with animals. This essay will discuss what animal liberation is, the main philosophers behind animal liberation, how animal liberation view the relationship with animals, the importance of the individuals role in creating their own relationships with animals, and how vegetarian diets are more sustainable than non-vegetarian diets and the criticism of this view.
Animal liberation is the idea of understanding that animals do not exist for the purposes of human benefit (Callicott 1980). Animals are sentient beings, this enables them to be able to sense, suffer, understand or experience subjectively (Singer 1975). Animal liberation views that all sentient beings are warranted to the control over their own lives and their most basic fundamental interests (Singer 1975). The two main approaches in the animal liberation view of thinking are based around Peter Singer’s utilitarian view and Tom Regan’s absolutist or deontological view (Jamieson 1998).
The utilitarian view incorporates that non-human animals cannot perceive the thought of time and space, for instance, they cannot contemplate the future; by which they have nothing to lose by dying. Animals are sentient beings and thus have no interest in suffering but do not have an interest in the future (singer 2011). Peter Singer holds the view that there is no definite moral requirement not to eat animals, however only if the animals have been raised without suffering and killed painlessly (Singer 1975). An absolutist or deontological approach views all beings that possess certain cognitive capabilities, ought to be identified with inherent moral worth (Regan 2001). Humans base their moral rights on the capability of having cognitive abilities. Thus the animals that possess cognitive abilities have the same moral rights as humans (Regan 2001). However only humans can act as moral agents, therefore non-humans act as
Animal liberation is the idea of understanding that animals do not exist for the purposes of human benefit (Callicott 1980). Animals are sentient beings, this enables them to be able to sense, suffer, understand or experience subjectively (Singer 1975). Animal liberation views that all sentient beings are warranted to the control over their own lives and their most basic fundamental interests (Singer 1975). The two main approaches in the animal liberation view of thinking are based around Peter Singer’s utilitarian view and Tom Regan’s absolutist or deontological view (Jamieson 1998).
The utilitarian view incorporates that non-human animals cannot perceive the thought of time and space, for instance, they cannot contemplate the future; by which they have nothing to lose by dying. Animals are sentient beings and thus have no interest in suffering but do not have an interest in the future (singer 2011). Peter Singer holds the view that there is no definite moral requirement not to eat animals, however only if the animals have been raised without suffering and killed painlessly (Singer 1975). An absolutist or deontological approach views all beings that possess certain cognitive capabilities, ought to be identified with inherent moral worth (Regan 2001). Humans base their moral rights on the capability of having cognitive abilities. Thus the animals that possess cognitive abilities have the same moral rights as humans (Regan 2001). However only humans can act as moral agents, therefore non-humans act as