Singer's Views On Animal Rights
Lechi Sun
ENVS 345
Assignment 1
10/10/2014
According to Singer’s points of view, we should expand the meaning of the equality, animals should be included in the rights of equality. Non-human animals deserve the same consideration as humans because they can suffer. Animals can feel pleasure and pain as well. Although animals and human are basically different, actually, everything on this planet is different, however, what we need to do is that we need the equal consideration on everything. Singer considered that must human beings are specialists. First, Humans eat other species just in order to meet the needs for protein. Second, we test experiments on other animals in order to see if the theory or the medicine are safe to human. Third, contemporary …show more content…
However, Regan denied the point of view of utilitarianism, which is the Singer’s view. Regan use the example of Aunt Bea, he said that many people would feel kill Aunt Bea is morally wrong. However, the utilitarian will think it is right because killing Aunt Bea will benefits many children in hospital. Regan claimed that this point of view would lead some seriously immoral actions. In my point of view, Regan’s criticism of utilitarian doesn’t convincing because Regan just use an example to support his criticism, and the example is just an example. Most people are rational and not all the people will think Killing Aunt Bea is the best way to help others. The example itself is not right because it contains the personal subjective factor, because the man in the example mainly wants to avoid the increasing tax, then he comes with the idea, which is donation. Therefore, my position is on the Singer’s side. All sentient creatures deserve equal consideration. Because as far as am concerned, all the equality, moral standard are made for us, it doesn’t contain any other creatures. These sets of moral standard are unequal. We do what benefits to us, we never care about other animals, and we think that we own them. Today’s situation of human is only because we developed better than other animals, and this doesn’t mean we could use them on experiment, commercial, or hunting to meet out needs. Singer is right that human are speciesism, we will feel painful if we test experiments on infants because infants are human, we only care about the interests of our own
ENVS 345
Assignment 1
10/10/2014
According to Singer’s points of view, we should expand the meaning of the equality, animals should be included in the rights of equality. Non-human animals deserve the same consideration as humans because they can suffer. Animals can feel pleasure and pain as well. Although animals and human are basically different, actually, everything on this planet is different, however, what we need to do is that we need the equal consideration on everything. Singer considered that must human beings are specialists. First, Humans eat other species just in order to meet the needs for protein. Second, we test experiments on other animals in order to see if the theory or the medicine are safe to human. Third, contemporary …show more content…
However, Regan denied the point of view of utilitarianism, which is the Singer’s view. Regan use the example of Aunt Bea, he said that many people would feel kill Aunt Bea is morally wrong. However, the utilitarian will think it is right because killing Aunt Bea will benefits many children in hospital. Regan claimed that this point of view would lead some seriously immoral actions. In my point of view, Regan’s criticism of utilitarian doesn’t convincing because Regan just use an example to support his criticism, and the example is just an example. Most people are rational and not all the people will think Killing Aunt Bea is the best way to help others. The example itself is not right because it contains the personal subjective factor, because the man in the example mainly wants to avoid the increasing tax, then he comes with the idea, which is donation. Therefore, my position is on the Singer’s side. All sentient creatures deserve equal consideration. Because as far as am concerned, all the equality, moral standard are made for us, it doesn’t contain any other creatures. These sets of moral standard are unequal. We do what benefits to us, we never care about other animals, and we think that we own them. Today’s situation of human is only because we developed better than other animals, and this doesn’t mean we could use them on experiment, commercial, or hunting to meet out needs. Singer is right that human are speciesism, we will feel painful if we test experiments on infants because infants are human, we only care about the interests of our own