Should We Use Animals for Experiemental Purposes Within the Cognitive Sciences?
Cognitive Studies- Individual Report:
35%
Should we use animals for experimental purposes within the Cognitive Sciences?
Within the cognitive sciences and within the article Opposing Views on Animal Experimentation; Do Animals have Rights? Written by Tom L Beauchamp, the most frequently asked and most debated question throughout it is should we subject animals for experimental purposes to help improve our own understanding and knowledge? This article argues against other theorists about animal rights and questions if the moral value and these rights of animals is enough to stop humans from subjecting them to harm whilst engaging in experiments. Key elements within this report will discuss an objective approach to the use of these animals, in reference to Tom L Beauchamp’s argument against the use of animals for experimental testing, and acknowledging their rights.
Many argue if the information that we are gaining from using animals in experiments is even worth risking the animal’s rights and wellbeing. Every year animals are cruelly subjected to brutally savage and painful scientific experiments. It is believed from animal activists that in these experiments, animals are given no drugs to ease their pain, and once they are no longer useful for these experiments, they are killed. This is why many people educated on the topic ask where the rights of the animals are? What gives humans the right to decide that these animals are to be tested on? And why not test on humans?
Beauchamp’s article suggests that this because of the scientific contrasts between human life and animal life (Beauchamp, 1997, 114). Humans have ideally created a world where they are the dominant spices, where they rule. Humans believe to have cognitive capacities such as self-consciousness, purposive action, language skills, rationality, and being able to make moral judgements, and important properties such as feeling emotion, that seem to be more self-determing and significant then
35%
Should we use animals for experimental purposes within the Cognitive Sciences?
Within the cognitive sciences and within the article Opposing Views on Animal Experimentation; Do Animals have Rights? Written by Tom L Beauchamp, the most frequently asked and most debated question throughout it is should we subject animals for experimental purposes to help improve our own understanding and knowledge? This article argues against other theorists about animal rights and questions if the moral value and these rights of animals is enough to stop humans from subjecting them to harm whilst engaging in experiments. Key elements within this report will discuss an objective approach to the use of these animals, in reference to Tom L Beauchamp’s argument against the use of animals for experimental testing, and acknowledging their rights.
Many argue if the information that we are gaining from using animals in experiments is even worth risking the animal’s rights and wellbeing. Every year animals are cruelly subjected to brutally savage and painful scientific experiments. It is believed from animal activists that in these experiments, animals are given no drugs to ease their pain, and once they are no longer useful for these experiments, they are killed. This is why many people educated on the topic ask where the rights of the animals are? What gives humans the right to decide that these animals are to be tested on? And why not test on humans?
Beauchamp’s article suggests that this because of the scientific contrasts between human life and animal life (Beauchamp, 1997, 114). Humans have ideally created a world where they are the dominant spices, where they rule. Humans believe to have cognitive capacities such as self-consciousness, purposive action, language skills, rationality, and being able to make moral judgements, and important properties such as feeling emotion, that seem to be more self-determing and significant then