Preview

Summary and Critique of Dr Peter Singer's Human Use of Animals

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1316 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Summary and Critique of Dr Peter Singer's Human Use of Animals
Human Use of Animals: Summary and Critique
Charles Hall
Ivy Bridge College

In his interviews with both The Open University and The Colbert Report, Dr. Peter Singer discusses the unethical human use of animals. Most of his claims are highly controversial and are not taken well by most people.

Human Use of Animals: Summary and Critique
The use of animals in modern civilization has been a controversial subject for the past few decades. Author and Philosopher Peter Singer has made his standpoint clear on this particular subject. In his interviews with The Open University and Stephen Colbert he explains why he believes in what he does and gives his reasoning behind it.

Singer’s idea of what defines a person is, “a person is someone who is aware of their own existence over time, and who is aware enough to realize that they are the same being who lived previously and who can expect to keep living into the future.”(Singer 2008) he goes on to give details of what constitutes personhood by stating that infants are not persons because they have not yet become self-aware, but a chimpanzee is a person because it can recognize itself in a mirror. He also states that humans with severe brain damage or someone who is intellectually impaired may have once been a person but is no longer a person. Dr. Singer believes that this is an important argument to the wrongness of killing as he clearly states, “I do think the idea of a being who can envisage his or her own future is morally significant, because if you compare the wrongness of killing a being who is capable of having some anticipation of the future, some desires for the future, perhaps even some projects to complete in the future, and you kill such a person who wants to go on living, you’re doing something wrong to that person which is something you’re not doing if you kill a being who is fully not a person and who can have no wishes or hopes for the future, and therefore you can’t cut off or thwart or frustrate



References: Singer. (Writer) (2008, January 28). Human use of animals. Ethics Bites. [Audio podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/culture/philosophy/human-use-animals Singer, P. S. (2006). Peter singer [Television series episode]. In Colbert, S. (Executive Producer), the Colbert report. New York, NY: Comedy Central. Retrieved from http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/79412/december-11-2006/peter-singer

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Imagine an animal’s feeling of panic and fear as it is about to be killed by a hunter or the isolation experienced as an animal sits in a laboratory, separated from its family and natural habitat, waiting to be harmed by harsh testing methods. Imagine the frightened state of a mother or father watching their innocent baby being captured. After considering the brutality towards animals in these scenarios, take into consideration the health benefits humans receive from different parts of these animals. Imagine health risks avoided through testing on animals first instead of on humans. Does human benefit justify the harm and killing of animals? Linda Hasselstrom’s essay “The Cow Versus The Animal Rights Activist” and Tom Regan’s “Animal Rights, Human Wrongs” argue this question through analysis of the reason for killing animals, the method in which they are killed, and the morality of the killing of animals.…

    • 1234 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jeremy Rifkin 's article, “A Change of Heart About Animals” argues that animals are more like humans than we imagine and as a result should be treated with the care that they deserve. Rifkin develops and supports his argument using facts about the animals and these facts end up touching hearts. In order for Rifkin to get his point across he uses a smart technique by using pathos and plays with the emotions of his audience. Rifkin loves animals and his passion and love evokes emotions that the audience can feel. Animals can feel and have emotions similar to ours. in agreement with Rifkin, I argue that it is wrong and inhumane to kill or abuse animals because they feel, they deserve to have space and should be valued as much as humans are It is wrong no animal should be killed due to abuse or testing, it is wrong and inhumane.…

    • 838 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Peter Singer's Argument

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages

    You've looked at a few things that present Peter Singer's argument against the way we use animals for food and other products. Pretend that you're talking to a friend and they ask you why Singer thinks it's wrong to eat a cheeseburger. Explain his argument (or what you take to be the core of his argument).…

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Much thanks to Jeremy Rifkin for showing us that science supports what we pet owners and animal rights activists have known in our hearts all along: animals have feelings and abilities not very different from humans. I found the stories about Koko the gorilla who is fluent in sign language, and Betty and Abel, the tool-making crows, intriguing and heart-warming. When will more people begin to realize that we share this world with many creatures deserving of our care and respect? However, Rifkin should take his argument farther. Animals have a right to live without being confined, exploited, tormented or eaten.…

    • 391 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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
  • Better Essays

    Peter Singer Argument

    • 1055 Words
    • 5 Pages

    2. In “Animal Liberation”, Peter Singer argues that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. He believes that a lot of our modern practices are speciesist, and that they hold our best interest above all else. The only animals that we give equal consideration are humans. He questions our reasonings for giving equal consideration to all members to our species, because, some people are more superior than others, in terms of intelligence or physical strength. Humans value themselves over…

    • 1055 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Singer is analyzing/ reviewing “Animals, Me and Morals.” He is against the exploitation of animals or nonhumans. Currently we are discriminating against animals just because we “CANNOT” tell that they are in pain. We have animals undergo these horrible experiments for the sake of science just because they are beneath us in every way. Singer uses both pathos and logos to get the reader’s attention. Singer wrote an overall good analysis because he did have authoritative evidence, and he did state both the arguments and the counterarguments, though he did rely too much on emotion. Singer also makes two major points which are communication and pain.…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Phil. outline

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages

    B. Singer then turns to the substantive issue of “what are the implications of utilitarianism for our treatment of animals?”…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Tom Regan Animal Rights

    • 1452 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Animals contain traits that humans acquire into their everyday lives, yet humans find different approaches to make these animals suffer on a day to day basis. Tom Regan, author of Animal Rights, Human Wrongs, describes various situations in which humans hunt animals for pleasure while Stephen Rose, author of Proud to be a Speciesist, illustrates why a speciesist like himself would use animals for research. Tom Regan’s describes his main point as to why humans would want to slaughter such precious animals to have them for resources. On the opposing side of the argument, Stephen Rose’s argument states that animal cruelty cannot be considered wrong because “Many human diseases and disorders are found in other mammals…” (Rose 553). Although Regan…

    • 1452 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer’s “Down on the Factory Farm” and E.B. White’s “Death of a Pig” illustrate practices of raising animals for human consumption. The care and environment provided for the animals by both White and the factory farmer’s that Singer discusses can be labelled as ‘animal husbandry’. White and the factory farm worker’s animal husbandry methods can be deemed as ethical, or unethical. Bernard E. Rollin defines good animal husbandry as “keeping the animals under conditions to which their natures [are] biologically adapted, and augmenting these natural abilities by providing additional food, protection, care, or shelter” (6). Through this definition of ethics and the criteria established by the “Principles” found in James P. Sterba’s “Reconciling Anthropocentric and Nonanthropocentric…

    • 530 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tom Regan's Position

    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages

    An Argumentative essay that looks at and breaks down the philosophical difference between Tom Regan’s position on Animal rights and, Peter Singer’s position on Animal liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals.…

    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Peter Singers All Animals Are Equal, he claims we should give the same respect the lives of non human animals as we give the lives of humans and that all animals human and non-human are in fact equal. I agree with him because there is no reason as to why animals should not get the same rights and respect as us. Animals have interest, when these are similar to ours, or their pain is on a similar level why give them less consideration. All human and animals have similar feelings such as loving something or feeling pain when they get hurt. I agree with Singer in what he says when animals should be given the same respect and treated equally.…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Peter Singer and his philosophy have received a range of praise and criticism for his progressive views. Some have called him the most dangerous man in the world, while others consider him a hero in the teachings of morality and ethics. His detractors make mention of his views on Animal Equality, blasting his comparisons of modern man’s treatment of animals to that of; slavery the Holocaust, human suffering and infanticide. Singer’s essay, All Animals Are Equal, poses the argument that all sentiment beings are entitled to the most basic of dignities and consideration, no different than those considerations reserved for humans. Singer draws no line of distinction between our species and other species who we, as humans…

    • 1249 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Animals Vs Vegetarianism

    • 1472 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The processed meat industry is an 800 billion dollar industry killing over 10 billion animals each in the United State alone. Factory farmed livestock account for over 99% of all the meat consumed by Americans even though they are raised in these despicable conditions. Many animals raised on factory farms live in abhorrent conditions where they are unable to turn around in their own cages, live in their own feces, and never even see the light of day.. Peter Singer dives into the idea that all animals are equal in a selection taken out of his book Animal Liberation, found in James and Stuart Rachels’ The Right Thing To Do, and advocates for the humane treatment of animals. Singer lays out the argument that it is morally wrong to make animals…

    • 1472 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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

Related Topics