Preview

Peter Singer

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
89 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Peter Singer
Peter Singer has influentially argued that animals’ interests must be given equal consideration to comparable human interests-so that, for example, a human’s and an animal’s interest in avoiding suffering should be considered equally morally important (Degrazia, Mappes, & Brand-Ballard, 2011, pg. 251). Animals have their own way of life and are not exactly made like humans. How are we able to trust research that works on animals but may not work on humans? Because our species are very different, animal experimentation should not be conducted and is morally unacceptable.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Pete Seeger

    • 1814 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Pete Seeger is an extremely talented artist who is very well known for his contributions to folk music. Pete Seeger is an absolute inspiration to many people around the world today. Not only was Pete Seeger just a singer/songwriter, he was also an important political activist, the author of several dozen books, an environmentalist as well as a peace advocator. He plays a very significant role in terms of historical influences. As a man of many identities, Pete Seeger will always remain an influential individual in regards to American History. It is definitely worth discussing the many roles Pete Seeger acquired and how each of these roles assisted in impacting American History.…

    • 1814 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    PETER DRUCKER

    • 2213 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The road to an organization’s success depends on the PEOPLE. In Peter Drucker’s writings, there was always a part on people and how they can CONTRIBUTE. Before the internet and social media congested world of today; Drucker noticed how people behaved with their work duties. Whether it was putting a tire on a car; talking strategy on how to move the business forward or volunteers interacting with each other at a non-profit, Drucker soon realized that successful organizations have the foundation of great people.…

    • 2213 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer

    • 876 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It is an irrefutable fact that we should help each other. However sometimes help to others poses some danger to either us or others. In Peter Singer's essay "Famine Affluence, and Morality" Peter Singer argues that we ought, morally, to prevent starvation due to famine. Singer begins by saying that assistance has been inadequate as richer countries prioritize development above preventing starvation. Singer then states that "suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad" (404) and assumes that it is uncontroversial enough to be accepted without justification. He then next raises the linked premise that we morally ought to prevent something 'bad' from happening as long as we have the means and it does not entail compromising on anything of 'comparable moral significance', using the analogy of a drowning child and hence assuming the principle _of "_universalizability" (405). As Singer writes, he attempts to justify why he feels that it is within our means to do so without sacrificing anything morally significant, and concludes that we hence morally ought to prevent starvation due to famine.…

    • 876 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer's Life

    • 251 Words
    • 2 Pages

    I couldn’t help but feel like I was fighting against pro-euthanasia with her. Johnson’s description of her daily activities, provided a better understanding of the difficulties disabled people face every day. Although she struggled, she never let her disability affect her quality of life. In fact, she thought that it allowed her to see things and experience things in a much different way. Almost as if she was more appreciative and grateful than the average person.…

    • 251 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer

    • 1227 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Peter Singer, an Australian philosopher and professor at Princeton University asks his students the simple question of whether they would save a drowning child from a pond, while wearing they’re bran new pair of expensive shoes. The response was aggressive and passive “How could anyone consider a pair of shoes, or missing an hour or two at work, a good reason for not saving a child’s life?” ¹ Singer continued to argue that “ according to UNICEF, nearly 10 million children under five years old die each year from causes related to poverty.” ² Is not saving a child drowning in a pond right in front of you the same thing as a child half way across the world dying in poverty? Peter Singer’s response would be a big yes, he explains his way of thinking in his book “The Life you can Save” it is like the ten commandment of how to end world poverty.…

    • 1227 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “All living beings have an inherent value and that to use any animals for experimentation is evil” (Mur 8). This statement made by Tom Regan in Animal Experimentation takes a strong stand on the controversial topic of animal testing, but this assertion is justified through various examples and research. He also states how humans, or moral agents, are able to apply moral principles in decision making. Because of this ability, humans have a duty to uphold that morality on other humans as well as those with an inherent value, such as animals. Animal activists strongly support this idea, yet researchers use animals to implement experiments that they claim to be morally justified and beneficial to humanity. However,…

    • 2075 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    For many years, the debate of whether animals have moral rights or not has been thrown around court rooms, social media, and protests. Arguments are made defending animals and suggesting that they should be protected and recognized in human society. Medical researchers are scrutinized and harassed by these supporters for their part in animal testing and medical investigation. Scientific breakthroughs have been made, which has transformed the development of modern medicine. Lifespans have elongated and lives are being saved in every corner of the world, yet somehow, this is still debated as if it is the wrong thing to do. Research animals are pertinent tools of the medical world and humans are entitled to use them as such. As human beings with…

    • 465 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    `”God loved the birds and invented trees. Man loved the birds and invented cages” (Deval, Jacques). There are many things wrong about animal research, and I think that a lot of it is wrong. Animal testing is wrong because it harms animals, animals’ rights are violated in tests, it is expensive, there are better alternatives, and the results of these tests aren’t always accurate or reliable.…

    • 1351 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Animal Testing Ethics

    • 1778 Words
    • 8 Pages

    It is not morally acceptable for scientists to use live animals in research for medicine that can be used to cure humans. Today we continue to use animals in experiments to learn more about health problems that affect both humans and animals and to ensure the safety of new medical treatments. Now that we know the purpose of animal testing, is it really worth killing millions of innocent animals? This practice is morally wrong and inconsiderate of us for letting this happen. People should stop using animals as experiment subjects and utilize the advance technology that we have now. This is happening because we are letting it happen! We have to start by educating others on this issue because the lack of knowledge on animal testing is why people…

    • 1778 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Research shows that 26 million animals have been used for testing of all different kinds. 26 million animals have been put through wringer for the sake of a human. 26 million animals have had no say, defense, or chance to save themselves. Animals are used as human experiments to see if a certain product can work or not. Animal testing is wrong on many different levels. If humans are not willing to use, test and experiment on themselves, why should one be allowed to test on an animal who has no say in what happens.…

    • 689 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In addition with no enforced laws, animals produce different results than humans. For instance, lead in w/transition “Even within the same species, similar disparities can be found among different sexes, breeds, age and weight ranges, and ethnic backgrounds” (“Results from Research…” n.pag.) The research people are doing will have an unlikely result in succeeding and or curing because they do not consider different characteristics of animals. Even with animals of the same species, there is no guarantee that all outcomes will be the same. Examine results show, “Animal studies are flawed by design. In addition to the fact that animals make poor surrogates for humans, the design of animal experiments is often inherently flawed, making it that much more unlikely that results obtained from such studies will be useful” (“Results from Research…”n.pag) The experiments we use on animals have no impact on human lives because even though animals have a similar body structure, they do not always correspond with the human anatomy. Scientists should put in more consideration with size, shape, skin, and different ways breeds function.…

    • 280 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Satire On Animal Testing

    • 1255 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Animals do not have a say once they are taken away from their current living space, and then killed or have to suffer through what the researchers put them through. These innocents now are being punished, abused, and now have more risks and a shortened life span. Realistically, in my opinion, in order to experiment on animals you really don’t have a heart. People who love animals, could never and would never experiment on them because the things that people do to them we really don’t deserve the satisfaction of animals. “Animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and "killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means." This piece of textual evidence is explaining how animals are not treated properly while being used in experimentation. Animals are forced to do things unwanted to, and also are deprived of certain things. Consider the people who have to do this for a living- they are finding cures for us humans, and also testing products such as cosmetics and shampoos and making sure that we can use them. You may think that animal testing is beneficial, but it's not, it's putting animals life in danger. Rabbits are used to test cosmetics and shampoos, during this process rabbits are powerless and have their eyelids opened by clips this can occur for days. Moving forward, as you can see many animals are harmed during the process and it is very heartbreaking to hear about the many animals that are hurt or killed to find cures for us. If you anyone who loves animals, if animal experimentation is okay, they would say it was abusive, because you taking the life of an innocent animal and putting it in…

    • 1255 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Most cultures highly value human health and life. That being said, humans take great lengths to promote and maintain this very health and life. In contrast, what gives humans the right to determine the health and value of an animal’s life. Just because humans have the power to manipulate an animal’s life, does not make animal testing justified. Clearly, animals with an inability to communicate or express an opinion cannot give an inform consent. This scenario is wholly unethical. Harmful testing on animals should be banned because it is immoral. Though some believe animal experimentation is vital for scientific advancements, viable alternatives for…

    • 1997 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In today’s society, many people debate whether or not using animals in research is humane. An estimated 26 million animals are used every year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing. [2] Proponents of animal testing state that it has enabled the development of numerous life-saving treatments for both humans and animals, while opponents state that animal testing is cruel and often yields irrelevant results because animals are so different from human beings. Many different animals are used in scientific studies such as rabbits, mice, primates, dogs, cats, pigs, and cows. I believe that animal testing is beneficial because it provides opportunities to improve the lives of both humans and animals.…

    • 587 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    All Animals Are Equal

    • 1760 Words
    • 8 Pages

    In this paper the condition for justified experimentation using animals is discussed. Singer states that if an experiment is truly important it would be acceptable to use a human patient, which shares the same cognitive level with an animal. In such a case, Singer considers it acceptable to substitute an animal. However, he realizes that, even though the only difference between the two is that one is a member of our species and the other is not, the animal would be the preferred choice for research purposes. This bias is what Singer refers to as being a speciesist. Speciesism is defined by him as a, “prejudice or attitude of bias favour of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species” (Page 6, All Animals are Equal).…

    • 1760 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays