Preview

Tom Regan's Position

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1157 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Tom Regan's Position
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.

This paper deals with the converse positions on Animal rights or Animal Liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals. From the philosophical position of Animal rights Regan argues, that is humans have the ability to have moral rights, so should animals. On the other hand, Singer’s philosophical position is the liberation of animals. He argues that attributing rights to animals is not. the only way of changing their moral status Thus we can see the distinction between the two is one of a philosophical difference, of Utilitarianism and the humanistic value of moral rights.

Tom Regan’s position on animal rights
To begin, we shall go over Tom Regan and his perspective on Animal rights. For example we look at Regan’s essay titled “ The rights of Humans and Animals’’.
…show more content…
That is to say if we are not consciously aware of ourselves as sentient beings, with no more reason to exist than those who cannot speak for themselves, we will continue to live in a plethora of ignorance, allowing for the atrocities that are inflicted on animals everyday in factory farms, laboratories, held captive for our own selfish desires and put on display as if they are bottles of wine. Granted, to initially start making the movement towards animal liberation would take decades to fully take hold. Humans fear change, this enables us to go into fight or flight mode, with unfortunately most of us on the path of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Regan, Tom. "Animal Rights, Human Wrongs." Forming a Critical Perspective. Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2010. 336-40. Print.…

    • 1234 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Regan begins the essay by stating that “. . . few people regard the animal rights position as…

    • 1452 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    James, Missy and Merickel, Alan P. Alex Epstein and Yaron Brook, The Evil of Animal “Rights”, Reading Literature and Writing Argument, Fourth Edition by, pg. 604-605.…

    • 1396 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better 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
  • Powerful Essays

    2. What reasons does Peter Singer give for his view that ‘differences between humans and animals’ are irrelevant to considerations of the moral ‘equality for animals’?…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful 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

    In "The Case for Animal Rights," Tom Regan writes about his beliefs regarding animal rights. Regan states the animal rights movement is committed to a number of goals, including: "the total abolition of the use of animals in science; the total dissolution of commercial animal agriculture; and the total elimination of commercial and sport hunting and trapping. Regan goes on and tells us the "fundamental wrong is the system that allows us to view animals as our resources, here for us--to be eaten, or surgically manipulated, or exploited for sport or money." Once people accept this view of animals being here for our resources, they believe what harms the animal doesn't really matter. Regan explains that in order to have this changed, people must change their beliefs. If enough people, especially people that hold a public office, change their beliefs, there can be laws made to protect the rights of animals.…

    • 684 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cited: Epstein, Alex and Yaron Brook. "The Evil of Animal "Rights"." James, Missy and Alan P. Merickel. qtd in Reading Literature and Writing Argument. Upper Saddle River: Prentice hall, 2008. 604-605. Text. 8 September 2012.…

    • 787 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Moral quandaries regarding animals are still demanding the attention of many philosophers as they attempt to modify and inspect the relationship between morality and social policy. Contemporary applications of this issue can range from experimentations on animals for developing medicines (or even cosmetics) to whether human beings should avoid eating animal-based foods. There is a vast spectrum of moral issues that arise with respect to animals. However, most of the morally questionable situations are contingent on one fundamental question: do animals even have moral rights? And if so, to what extent?…

    • 1830 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful 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 contribute in many ways to our world. We seem to take for granted the benefits animals can have on us. The benefits animals have on our earth shouldn’t be taken for granted. Without animals, our earth would not receive the essential nutrients it needs to flourish. Establishing animal rights will give animals the love and respect that they’ve always deserved. Animal are not pieces of meat, they are a vital resource to the nutriment of our earth. We have been given the power to protect animals and give them rights of their own. We should not ignore the needs of animals. Animals have benefited us in ways no human can. It is our moral duty as humans to take a stand for animals and give them the rights they deserve. At this very moment animals are being abused and carelessly slaughtered. Now is the time to end the abuse of animals and give them the rights that benefits us…

    • 1733 Words
    • 7 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
  • Good Essays

    In his essay The Case for Animal Rights, Tom Regan has set out a broad outline as an introduction for his book, The Case for Animal Rights, with same title. In the beginning, the author makes a special emphasis on that, the goals of the advocation of animal rights not only make people treat animals ‘more humane’, but also deny the view, which is fundamental wrong, that animals are humans’ resources. As a defender of animal rights as well as a philosopher, Regan attempts, through his professional knowledge, which area he has been exploring over ten years, to justify that animals have the rights as equal as human beings. In his own words, “people must change their beliefs before they change their habits”.…

    • 552 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays