Preview

René Descartes Argument That Humans Are Not Animals Are Machines

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
379 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
René Descartes Argument That Humans Are Not Animals Are Machines
Anthropocentrism Essay René Descartes, in his proposition Animals Are Machines, makes the argument that animals are just machines; animals should not be held to the same standard that humans are. Descartes statement embodies the ideals of Anthropocentrism – the fundamental belief that humans are the most significant and important being on the planet. He also believes that animals are similar to human beings in their design and structure; however, animals function differently than humans do. Animals are deemed as “purely mechanical”, and they do not have thoughts, feelings, dreams, or emotions. Additionally, Descartes argues that animals do not have souls – they are beings that exist but with only basic functions, while souls are designed
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Life Of Pi Theme Analysis
    • 353 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Life Of Pi Theme Analysis

    Humans and animals are two different things; however, they can be the same. We consider ourselves different from animals because we don’t walk on all fours, don’t eat off the ground, we have manners, we know the difference between right and wrong, and we have free will. Although, animals have the ability to do what they want when they want,…

    • 353 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Cartesian Dualism Flaws
    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Cartesian Dualism Flaws

    In Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes concludes that we are distinct from our body, and can exist without it. Seen from a modern materialist’s perspective, Descartes’ view is quite obviously wrong. However, assuming no knowledge of modern science, we should still be able to disprove his conclusion by looking for flaws in his reasoning in the text. In this essay, I will examine three relevant arguments Descartes presents in his sixth meditation and point out their flaws respectively.…

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer's Argumentative Essay: The Rights Of Animals
    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Peter Singer's Argumentative Essay: The Rights Of Animals

    Animals deserve rights because just like humans, they feel excruciating pain, suffer and have feelings. One would argue that animals don’t experience emotions? But the answer is of course they do. It is emotions that allow animals to display various behavior patterns. According to the theory of utilitarianism, all sentient beings should be given consideration in the society and this includes both animals and humans. Also, animals cannot speak for themselves and for this reason they should be treated equally, protected and given the same respect as human beings. Peter singer’s approach also supports the argument on equal consideration in that animals deserve the same respect as human beings but just in a different view. In today’s society humans exploit animals for milk, meat, fur, scientific experimentation etc. and animals are constantly injured or killed. Their pain and sufferings should be taken into consideration, as this unjust treatment is morally unacceptable. Similarly speciesism is an…

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    A Change Of Heart About Animals, By Jeremy Rifkin
    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages

    A Change Of Heart About Animals, By Jeremy Rifkin

    The world is filled with ideas and topics in which people get to decide if it’s right or wrong, but how do you which one is truly right? Facts and proven statements are what makes you decide on the one if more accurate then just having a person say what they think. On an article titled “A Change of Heart About Animals,” by Jeremy Rifkin has information on how animals, “are more like us than we ever imagined.” I disagree. I strongly believe humans are and will always be the dominant species and animals shouldn’t ever be on the same level with us, animals are inferior to us and humans will always use them for our needs.…

    • 1258 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Summary of Peter Singer's 'All Animals are Equal'
    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Summary of Peter Singer's 'All Animals are Equal'

    It gives basic moral significance to things that are able to experience pain and pleasure. Human’s and non humans can most certainly experience pain and pleasure therefore we all deserve equality. Singer argues that we have a direct duty to animals, to include their interest in our moral reasoning. Whether or not animals can author treatises on mathematics they like us feel pain and we therefore have an obligation not to cause them needless suffering. Singer denounces all forms of what he calls “speciesism” whereby human beings believe they can exploit animals merely because they do not belong to the species homo sapiens. Just because animals aren’t homo sapiens doesn’t mean they are not equal. They have hearts, they pump blood, they breathe and they create life, these are all qualities us humans…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Descartes Divisibility
    • 1053 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Descartes Divisibility

    Rene Descartes believes that the mind and body is different things and that the body is dividable but the mind is not dividable. I’m not sure what I believe, but I think I believe at least for now that the mind and body is two different things. I will explore why Descartes thinks you can divide a body and why he thinks a mind is not dividable. As well as what Descartes response should be to Armstrong’s criticism. Was Descartes right or not? I think this is all up to the interpretation of Descartes Divisibility. There is a number of ways this may be interpreted.…

    • 1053 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Are Zoos Morally Defensible Analysis
    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Are Zoos Morally Defensible Analysis

    The position that human interests form the center of this universe- our desires, needs, goals, preferences, and our love for one another-as opposed to animals or even God has long been held as true. Moral philosophers however have recently challenged this anthropocentric view. Presently, there is increasing debate over how we treat the natural world and those we share it with. In Tom Regan's essay, "Are Zoos Morally Defensible" Tom explains two arguments against anthropocentrism, utilitarianism and the rights view, to answer the question of the defensibility of zoos.…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Lori Gruen: Why Do Animals Matter?
    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Lori Gruen: Why Do Animals Matter?

    However, he thinks both animals and humans are machines made by God. Descartes is saying that you can not harm things that does not obtain…

    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    The Kantian View of Animal Ethics
    • 1830 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Kantian View of Animal Ethics

    Although animal moral considerability has peaked the interest of many contemporary philosophers, such as James Rachels and Peter Singer, the question is really an age-old question that can be traced back to Plato and Aristotle. Immanuel Kant has probed the question of whether an animal has moral considerability. Kant continuously makes the distinction between humans and animals throughout his best-known contributions to moral philosophy. Therefore, I will address and present the counter-argument to the charge of speciesism, one of critical arguments of the animal rights movement, through a Kantian lens.…

    • 1830 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Animal Consciousness - Paper
    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Animal Consciousness - Paper

    In “The Problem of Animal Consciousness: Do Horses Gallop in Their Sleep?” Matt Cartmill argues that concsciousness does not only contribute to humans, but to non-humans as well, animals. Consciousness has been prescribed as a human experience in spite of all of the evidence that has been showed that animals have consciousness. Philosophers and scientists believe that consciousness has no evolutionary history, because they think that humans are the only creatures that have it. Because nonhuman animals lack some mental abilities, we regard them as property, the only moral constraint that we observe on our use of other animals is an obligation not to make them suffer. But who is to say that animals don't have consciousness? Animals not only have consciousness, but some have more consciousness then some of us human beings. Thats why, Cartmill is attempting to try to persuade people, mainly philosophers and scientists, that animals have consciousness.…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Argumentative Essay: The Issue Of Granting Animal Rights
    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Argumentative Essay: The Issue Of Granting Animal Rights

    Animals from creation have been an essential integral part of human beings. They have frequently been, either directly or indirectly, used by humans to achieve their needs. Hence they are important part and great asset to humans. These animals do have lives different from that of humans and equally have some similar characteristics with humans like emotional feelings. This very fact puts humans in a difficult position of determining the amount of respect and regard that should be accorded to the animals. Some people agitate that animals should be granted same equal rights as human beings. Inasmuch as I quite agree that animals should be granted some rights in order to be free from cruel treatments by humans, the issue of granting them equal full rights as enjoyed by humans should not come up. An objective review of such factors as tradition, cultural believes, religious, socio-economic, and medical as well as salient natural features that distinguish animals from humans like morality, and ability to…

    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Taking a Stand Against Peta
    • 2615 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Taking a Stand Against Peta

    Animal rights debater Stephen R. L. Clark points out, “As humans, we are like the other animals and unlike them, tied to them and separate, in many ways,” (Golding). For example, humans are animals, our nature is an animal nature, our desires are, for the most part, animal desires, and our habit of hunting is like that of other animals. However, what sets us apart from other animals is the fact that we have legal rights (the right to vote) and moral rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). The distinction must be made that animals obviously can't have the same rights as humans, because their interests are not always the same as ours, and some rights would be irrelevant to animals. For instance, an animal such as a cat doesn't have an interest in voting and, therefore, doesn't have the right to vote because that right would be as meaningless…

    • 2615 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Killing Animals In Animal Liberation, By Peter Singer
    • 1958 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Killing Animals In Animal Liberation, By Peter Singer

    Animals and other living creatures in this world, share the same right as us to have their own independent existence and modes of living. Edward Freeman in his famous quote regarded to the relationship between humans and animals states “The awful wrongs and suffering forced upon the innocent helpless, faithful animal race forms the blackest chapter in the whole world’s history”. Even though the human race slaughters animals to fulfill resources needed to sustain the population, still is not satisfied with the bounty of products that nature offers, but have got more greedy in over consuming every single part of these poor innocent creatures without necessity. Peter Singer in “Animal Liberation” suggests that human should leave animals alone “as much as…

    • 1958 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Immanuel Kant's Views On Animal Rights
    • 1603 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Immanuel Kant's Views On Animal Rights

    Kant felt that humans have no duty to animals. He stated ““Animals are not self-conscious and are there merely as a means to an end. The end is man.” According to Immanuel Kant, humans have no direct duties to animals. Kant’s moral view of animals is that if it benefits humankind then the right of the animal should have no regard at all. Kant believed in science, he believed that if an animal had a scientific…

    • 1603 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Tom Regan Animal Rights Summary
    • 990 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Tom Regan Animal Rights Summary

    Determining the rights of non-human animals and deciding how to treat them may not be a choice available to our human society. As an advocate for the rights of animals, Tom Reganʻs three main goals are to abandon the use of animals in any scientific research, discontinue all commercial animal agriculture, and to completely terminate both commercial and sport animal hunting. To support these intentions, Regan argues that every human and non-human animal possesses inherent value, which makes them all more than a physical object or vessel. He then states that possessing inherent value allows every human and non-human to have rights of their own. To further his argument, Regan claims that the any human and non-human retaining rights requires equal treatment and respect from others. To conclude his argument, Regan states that due to these reasons, non-human animals cannot be treated as resources and must be treated by humans as equals. In this paper, I object to Reganʻs third premise, which states that non-human and human animals must be treated as equals and with respect, because our communication barrier with non-human animals restricts us from determining their notion of equal treatment or respect, and that attempting to do so could…

    • 990 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics