Critique Of The Article 'Of Primates And Personhood'

What makes a primate a primate? A primate is defined by its many incredible features. A primate is a mammal that has certain characteristics such as: flexible fingers and toes, opposable thumbs, flatter face than other mammals, eyes that face forward and spaced close together, large and complex cerebrum, and social animals. What makes a primate a primate is its characteristics. Some of the physical features primates are identified by is their teeth, snouts, eyes, ears, arms, legs, fingers, and toes. Human evolution is a big part of humans being primates, and having similar features and characteristics make humans to be considered to be a primate, but both humans and non-humans have differences.

Suzuki mentioned in his article about medical research and experiments of Jane Goodall using chimpanzees greatly affect the population of chimpanzees. Furthermore, human moves animals from their homes and lands to zoos for education and

Within this essay, we will study more in depth the behavioral as well as physical traits of two primates at a zoo from their interaction with their peers to their place in the group. This observation would enable us to further understand the possible existing correlation between humans and primates. First, I studied a female chimpanzee with her baby, and then, a dominant male gorilla, in San Francisco Zoo at about noon, on May 23, 2015, for an hour each. Even though they share some similarities such as having a large brain, living for a long time, and being bored in their enclosure, they are still different; when gorillas are the largest, chimpanzees are the smartest. In fact, chimps use tools to catch food, they would not be able to reach

Jane Goodall uses her essay to prove that animals should not be used for testing, “To my mind, it should be required that all scientists working with laboratory animals, whatever the species, not only know something about the animals and their natural behavior but see for themselves how their protocols affect individual animals” (Goodall line 144-147). Furthermore, Goodall’s essay describes how miserable the living environment is for the chimpanzees and monkeys, “The tape showed scenes from inside a biomedical research laboratory, in which monkeys paced round and round, back and forth, within incredibly small cages stacked one on top of the other, ad young chimpanzees, in similar tiny prisons, rocked back and forth or from side to side, far gone misery and despair” (Goodall 4-8). Chimpanzees are tested on because we have similar DNA. Scientists inject Chimpanzees with horrible diseases like HIV, “Once their quarantine was over they would be separated, I was told, and placed single in other cages, to be infected with hepatitis and AIDS or some other viral disease” (Goodall line 34-36). In other words, testing on poor innocent creatures is inhumane. These chimpanzees don’t get to choose how they live; their freedom was simply taken away from

For this assignment, I have decided to design an enclosure about the primate, Mandrill. I will, in words, describe an enclosure that will prevent these nonhuman primates from not being suited to their natural habitat needs. Throughout this assignment, I will design my very own version of a perfect enclosure that secures these primates by critically thinking of any psychological or physical problems that can occur. What also will need to partake is considering the perspective of the nonhuman primates, the zookeepers, and the visitors as well. Designing an enclosure has to be precise and detailed. I will do the best I can to be as detailed as I can be when designing this enclosure.

In the article,”Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?”, author Ed Yong implies that different types of primates such as apes should be treated more like human beings. He starts by stating a claim the there is some type of schism between different types of scientists and the world. Yong also explains the the Swiss law and how it protects the “dignity” of organisms. He also states that the apes are basically in “battle” Yong then starts to talk about what measures the GAP tries to take in order to give the apes some type of rights. He also explains the different measures that other countries have taken to help the apes within their country, and then he makes another claim in which

In 1925, the Scopes "Monkey" Trial captured national interest and the infamous moniker "Trial of the Century" due to William Jennings Bryan serving as part of the prosecution and Clarence Darrow serving as defense counsel to John Scopes with the social divide between science and religion serving as the backdrop, a controversy that has persisted to the modern day. William Jennings Bryan(henceforth Bryan) was well-known to the American people for his political involvement with the Democrat party and his passionate speeches as a Presbyterian. In contrast, Clarence Darrow(henceforth Darrow) was well known for his work as an attorney regarding labor law issues and his work as a defense attorney during the Franks murder trial, a trial that was also called the "Trial of the Century", where he defended Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb. Between the involvement of these two titanic public figures, the social divide between science and religion only served to stoke the flames of public interest even further. In order to understand why the Scopes “Monkey” Trial was given the infamous moniker “Trial of the Century” and why it captured national interest, I have to discuss the historical context of society's belief

Non human primates’ social organization can provide useful information how human social evolution occurs. We will go over main points of how similar and different non human primates such as chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas’ society are compared to ours, humans.

     I think that if culture is defined as learned behavior, than it is reasonable to say that primates posses a form of culture. Primates have been observed making tools to aid in collecting food and developing communication system, both of which are learned behaviors.

However, sanctuaries exist, such as the one in Florida, where primates from around the country goes to live a much better life rather than live a life in a small, isolated cage with no interaction. Steven Wise and the Nonhuman Rights Project wants to move primates into the sanctuaries so that they do not have to live in cages. Their claim is that primates are considered a legal person and are entitled to basic rights, such as those given to children. He states many reasons as to why they are considered a legal person and not a thing with no rights.

One of the main reasons why we are so interested in the other primates is that by looking at them we can obtain some ideas of what our ancestor must have been like a few millions years ago. Even though, we are not descended from any modern-type monkey or ape, our lineage does appear to have gone through stages in which we were a medium-sized, reasonably intelligent creature with good binocular vision, hands that were good at manipulation and the ability to climb trees. An evolutionary trend in primates involves the development of offspring both before and after birth and their integration into complex social systems. Another trend in primate evolution has been toward a more elaborate brain. In addition to brain size and gestation periods,

First and foremost, the chimpanzees will be equally protected and hopefully we will see the rise of their numbers in the next several years. On the other hand, important biomedical research may be halted or heavily delayed because of the new requirements. Many people, like Wayne Pacelle, chief executive of the Humane Society, and Erika Fleury of the North American Primate Sanctuary Alliance, believe that because of these restrictions on biomedical research with chimps, the primate sanctuaries will grow with their new inhabitants, causing a vital aid to chimpanzee conservation. Evidently there are two distinct responses to this new change: there is a heavy blow to biomedical research but also captive chimpanzees are under the same, needed protection as their wild

Where does that leave the Great Ape Protection and Cost Saving Act? Anecdotally, whenever I see any ape, I have a different emotional response than I do to other animals. It is almost a feeling of respect and awe. For instance, when I have been to the zoo and an ape came up the glass and we looked into each others eyes, it felt different than looking to a mouse’s, drosophila’s, or any other animal’s that is used for animal testing. Based purely off this, this limit on research seems justified. But stepping into the

Chimpanzees are a genus of the great ape of Africa, with long black hair and log protruding ears. Humans know them for their intelligence and there very similarities. They have developed family ties similar to man. Over the generations they have even had developed tools out of natural materials. Food for chimpanzees is very important to them due to the excessive amount eating.

They are our closest evolutionary cousins. They wear our clothes and star in our TV shows. Yet, they are treated cruelly in the poaching industry and research facilities. They have been observed meeting most of the criteria for what we define as ‘human’, yet their habitats and wellbeing are being intruded everyday. The belief that all humans have ascribed natural rights that can not be infringed upon by a system of government is a fairly new concept, becoming predominant in the 20th century. However, religious scriptures have made mention of these concepts as early as 5 thousand years ago. It is apparent that though concrete natural rights for persons may be a recent idea in society, civilizations have been attempting to define the rights of personhood for millennia. I use the language ‘persons’, intentionally, to exhibit the contrast between this and ‘human’. Though the two words have become almost synonymous in modern day language, personhood is not exclusively defined by humanity by definition. We simply have not observed any species that we have unanimously considered worthy of this title. This brings in a moral dilemma, as people wonder what species, if any, should be ascribed personhood along with its rights, and to what extent. I propose that a potential candidate, that will kickstart conversation about the rights of all animals, is the Chimpanzee. A major justification for this is their genetic and behavioral similarity to that of a person. Exhibiting a