Royal Institute of Philosophy Speciesism and the Idea of Equality Author(s): Bonnie Steinbock Source: Philosophy‚ Vol. 53‚ No. 204 (Apr.‚ 1978)‚ pp. 247-256 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3749431 Accessed: 05/08/2010 08:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use‚ available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR’s Terms and
Free Morality Human
Nasro Hassan Reading Response 5 1. According to Singer speciesism is the unjustified attitudes and bias towards the interest of members of one’s species or against those members of another species. Singer believes that the basis of equality is if a being can suffer. If a being can suffer than it should have some moral worth. Therefore animals are beings because they can suffer. 2. According to Kant only rational beings are moral‚ animals are not rational so they have no moral worth. We only have
Premium Human Mammal Animal rights
Sagarika Reddy Philosophy Honors 03/28/16 Dr. Shorter Speciesism and Moral Status In his work Speciesism and Moral Status‚ Peter Singer compares the behaviors of humans with cognitive disabilities to the behaviors of nonhuman animals. He argues that all human beings do not have cognitive abilities that exceed that of all nonhuman animals. In fact‚ many nonhuman animals have cognitive abilities that surpass the cognitive abilities of human beings with severe mental retardation. Through his argument
Premium Religion God Morality
food every day. I will draw on the Cora Diamond’s concept of speciesism on this issue. The salient features of the issue are should us humans support animal rights or should we not support the rights of animals? People who support the rights of animals often avoid eating meat‚ while people who don’t support the rights of animals eat meat. I will argue that Cora Diamond’s concept of speciesism can help make sense of this issue. Speciesism is treating others within the same species with the same rights
Premium Animal rights Human Morality
According to Webster’s dictionary‚ speciesism is the assumption of human superiority leading to the exploitation of animals. It was present by Singer in Animal Liberation. In his book‚ he explains his argument against how animals are abused for human benefit because of the common thought that humans are superior to animals. His position is that animals should be treat with the same respect as human beings instead of subpar. Singer makes it clear that animals are equal to humans‚ not inferior‚ and
Premium Human Animal rights Mammal
treatment of them did not turn us into them. 2. What does Singer mean by saying that all animals are equal? What does he mean by "speciesism‚" and how is it like racism and sexism? What does Singer mean by saying that all animals are equal? What does he mean by "speciesism‚" and how is it like racism and sexism? According to Merriam Webster dictionary Speciesism is: Giving moral preference to the interests of members of one’s own species‚ over identical interests of members of a different species
Premium Morality Human Ethics
beings. Singer thinks speciesism is a human failing. Speciesism‚ a term coined by Richard Ryder‚ can be defined as an unjustified bias that favours one’s own species over every other. Singer thinks that speciesism is a human failing. He urges the reader to consider his/her (our) fundamental attitudes from the point of view of those most disadvantaged by his/her (our) attitudes‚ and the practices that follow from these attitudes. Singer is a proponent against speciesism because he feels it fails
Premium
In his essay‚ Peter Singer defines a term‚ speciesism‚ which means the “attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species”(204). Singer compares the speciesists with racists in order to emphasize that like racists who “give greater weight to the interests of members of their own race when there is a clash between their interests and the interests of those of another race”(206)‚ the speciesists “give greater weight to the interests
Premium Animal rights Animal testing The Animals
Kant’s Ethics of Metaphysics: A Response To the Charge of Speciesism I. In this paper I will present the charge of speciesism contended by many animal right’s activists. I will attempt to substantiate Immanuel Kant’s view on animal morality and justify how his philosophy is not in violation of speciesism. Furthermore‚ I will explain how the Kantian view still grants animals some moral consideration through the designation of “indirect duties”. Lastly‚ I will present a difficulty with accepting
Premium Morality Immanuel Kant
This argument is based on more concrete facts that there are more differences and similarities between humans and non-humans. Therefore the rejection of speciesism is attributable to an historical continuing process. In the first stage traditional morality was accepted due to the general world view and acceptance. In the second stage the earth revealed not to be the Centre of the universe as such its special
Premium Charles Darwin Evolution Natural selection