Animal Liberation, By Peter Singer

Peter Singer’s argument is that all animals are equal and should be treated as such. He begins to build his argument by defining “equality”. Equality entails “equal consideration” for a being’s interests, with the potential for different treatment. Consider the difference in treatment between men and women in regards to abortion rights. Women have the right to get an abortion while men do not. This is not a difference in equality, but simply recognition of the fact that it could be in the interest of women to get one. Men on the other hand, have no desire or ability for this right. Singer

Peter Singer has written many works in support of animal rights. In one of his greatest works Animal Liberation, Singer goes into great depths on how similar in biology animals are to human beings. Another strong point was not only the biological resemblance, but also the behavioral tendencies and traits humans and nonhuman species share. There are two major areas of focus that Singer puts emphasis on that need to be recognized for the purposes of my argument. One focus is this utilitarian approach that only the human species carry: the belief of ethical and morally good behavior should be extended to the consideration of nonhuman species. The second focus that is the basis for my argument is Singer’s argument against a huge human social construct labeled speciesism.

Peter Singer is defined by being the most positive influencer of all living philosopher in the world. An Australian moral philosopher, environmentalist and animal activist, most noted for his work of Animal Liberation that was published in 1975, a canonical text in animal rights/liberation theory (Singer, 2002). Singer is often found arguing the wrongfulness of what human society performs to millions of suffering animals. A vigorous activist who specializes in applied ethics and ethical issues (Singer, 2002). He firmly believes that as humans we should become just like him and think and feel the way he does. Following his way of life, we could become vegetarians and not perform any wrongfulness to animals that do not deserve to be eaten

To start with, The term Animal Rights did not emerge until the late 1970 's, according to Encyclopedia Britannica. In Particular, Richard Ryder, a British Psychologist, expressed his boldest ideas, but in order to get his word out around the world he needed assistance from one of the top Australian philosophers, Peter Singer. Singer published numerous of notable books such as " Animal liberation " which described in vivid detail, the grueling agony animals had to suffer. In fact, Pete Singer got his inspiration for his book " Animal liberation " from his view on utilitarianism, the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the greatest number of people and animals. Indeed, the phrase Animal Rights first surfaced in the 1970

On the topic of animal rights, Vicki Hearne and Peter Singer represent opposite ends of a belief spectrum. Singer describes, in numerous articles, that he believes animal rights should focus on if the animal is suffering, and the best option to prevent it is to limit interaction between animals and humans. Specifically, in “Speciesism and Moral Status” Singer compares the intelligence and ability of non-human animals to those with severe cognitive disabilities to establish an outrageous solution to animal belittlement. He uses logos (the appeal to reason) and ethos (the appeal to ethics), to question the current rights in place to appeal to other scholars. Nevertheless, his approach can cause an emotional disconnect to the readers; this apparent in contrast to Hearne’s pathos (the

Justin Torres Novel We the Animals is a story about three brothers who lived a harassed childhood life. There parents are both young and have no permanent jobs to support their family. The narrator and his brothers are delinquents who are mostly outside, causing trouble, causing and getting involved in a lot of problems and barely attending school, which their parents allowed them to do. The narrator and his brothers were physically abused by their father, leading them to become more violent to one another and others, drinking alcohol and dropping out of school. Physical abuse is an abuse involving one person’s intention to cause feelings of pain, injury and other physical suffering and bodily harm to the victim. Children are more

If a farmer breeds cows, treats them as well as possible, and then kills them as painlessly as possible at age three for food, utilitarians and sentientist Kantians alike would believe this is morally justifiable. Utilitarians believe that humans should do what maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain, so while the cows may have an immediate interest in avoiding suffering, they have lived a happy life and have no concept of death, so painlessly killing and eating them would not be morally wrong. Sentientist Kantians would also believe that there is nothing wrong with killing the cows for food because Kantians believe that, given that there was no cruelty involved with raising and killing the cows, the cows are merely a means to an end.

In this case, Singer is discussing nonhuman equality. Singer argues that if a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. He characterises this as ‘sentience’ the ability having the capacity to suffer or experience enjoyment or happiness. Human speciesists do not accept that pain is as bad when it is felt by animals as it is felt by humans, which is the argument for extending the principle of equality to nonhumans. When making a distinction between animals and humans Singer states that there are many areas in which the superior mental powers of normal adult humans make a difference: anticipation, more detailed memory, greater knowledge of what is happening and so on. These differences between humans and animals lead to the conclusion that normal adult human beings have mental capacities which will, in certain circumstances lead them to suffer more than animals would in the same circumstances. However, Singer proposes that if we use this argument to justify experiments on nonhuman animals then we have to ask ourselves whether we are also prepared to allow experiments on human infants and retarded adults as they too would have no idea of what was going to happen to them. In conclusion, Singer argues that the difference between humans and animals should not be considered when defining the moral standards of animal equality, as the

The main theme of Animal Liberation by Peter Singer is summarized in one quote by Isaac Bashevis Singer, “In their behavior towards creatures, all men [are] Nazis” (84). Singer spends the whole book attempting to prove that Nazis and the abusers of animals are the same. He does this by talking about scientific testing and the way animals are treated before being killed for their meat. He dives into the specifics of what happens during animal testing and animals killed for meat in order to appeal to the humanity of the reader in order to exploit it. By exploiting the humanity of the reader Singer attempts to guilt the reader into becoming a vegetarian.

In "All Animals Are Equal," Peter Singer argues that any being with sentience should be granted equal moral consideration. In this paper, I will reconstruct Singer's argument and explain the premises on how he came to that conclusion. To begin with, Singer defines sentience as the capacity to suffer or experience enjoyment or happiness (Singer 53). Singer states that "if a being is not capable of suffering, or of experiencing enjoyment or happiness, there is nothing to be taken into account... This is why the limit of sentience... is the only defensible boundary of concern for the interests of other" (Singer 50).

Singer brings a new set of thought to the common belief about equality. He alludes to how the white slave owners’ once believed that the black slaves did not deserve equal treatment. The fundamental doctrine of equality for a period has been tested on human beings. The equality for a long period was vested in the treatment of women and blacks. Racism and gender prejudice have always been the ground for the argument for equality. However, according to what Singer posits, there is major concern that stipulates the need to expand the thoughts towards other species. Additionally, human beings are supposed to extend this thought to other nonhuman organisms. Grounded on the primary argument that the doctrine of equality was set, things should not

Singer starts the article by challenging the reader's idea of the last form of discrimination; too many the last form of discrimination was sex-based but to Singer that is not the case. He believes people false consciously accept sexism as the last form of discrimination because there are no other groups of women that have advocated for rights, but people fail to realize oppression and discrimination go unnoticed until the group being mistreated points out the mistreatment. People look past the mistreatment of animals because animals cannot advocate for their rights. He refers to the discrimination against animals as speciesism; speciesism is the innate superiority of a species (homo sapiens) to another species without a solid foundation other than self-interest. Just like a racist places the self-interest of members of their own race superior to members of another race, a speciesist places the self-interest of members of their own species superior to another species. He continues by saying people are often confused when talking about animal rights; are we supposed to give animals the right to vote? He explains this concern by bringing up a woman’s right to an abortion. Woman have the right to an abortion

While there have been a number of advances in animal protection and law in the last decade - enacting laws and formalizing specific rules for cruelty to show a fall - there are still many cases of animal abuse. This theme is of great importance because animals are entitled to rights, since they are living beings and have physical and emotional sensations similar to human ones. Through the Australian philosopher, Peter Singer, often considered the forerunner of the animal liberation movement, in which he leaves a milestone in the animal defense movement in his book "Animal Liberation" (published in 1973). Thus, this subject is of too much importance, aiming at the improvement of environmental protection laws, especially with regard to animals,

Animals are entitled to their own rights. Animal rights are the idea that animals do not belong to humans; they are not for us to eat, harm, domesticate, or experiment on. It is estimated that about 115 million animals are experimented on, or are abused and killed in the U.S every year(Avvo Inc.). Animals may never receive the respect they deserve for their contributions to our lives. Animals die to provide food, clothes, home decor, and experimental testing. We have been violating animals rights as if they were are not in existence. Peter Singer “states the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; it requires equal consideration.” Singer believes that people do not have to stop the use of animals completely, but still should be respected and at least have some consideration taken for them. Animals should not be the first option to use in testing when there are many alternatives.

The issues regarding animal rights have been highly debated and have sparked controversy in American politics for quite some time. Animal exploitation is happening among a majority of animal groups, including but not limited to farm animals, laboratory animals, companion animals and wildlife. The Animal Legal Defense Fund is sponsoring a petition to expand animal rights, and hopefully draft an “Animal Bill of Rights” in the future. An Animal Bill of Rights would help ensure all animals are guaranteed freedom, liberty, and the legal and social protection they have been denied for too long. A few of these injustices include, fur trapping and fur farming, animal captivity, and the mistreatment of farm and laboratory animals.