preview

Peter Singer All Animals Are Equal Summary

Decent Essays

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 claims that we should understand the concept of equality as a reason for accepting or endorsing the conclusion of his argument that any being with sentience should be granted equal moral consideration. What he means by this is that the concept of equality is a moral ideal and not a simple assertion of fact (Singer 52). …show more content…

The capacity to suffer and experience enjoyment or happiness are vital characteristics that gives a being the right to equal consideration, as well as a pre-requisite for having interests at all, which is a condition that must be satisfied before we can speak of interests in any meaningful way (Singer 52). Here, Singer is trying to establish that if a being is not sentient, the idea of extending moral consideration to it makes no sense. For Singer, to have interest means to be sentient, and to be sentient is to have the possibility of being inflicted with pain. Essentially, Singer argues against killing nonhuman animals as means to our own ends. He believes that we ought to refrain from such killing since usually the benefit we gain from them, such as food, is outweighed by their loss of life. That is, "the principle of equal consideration of interests does not allow major interests to be sacrifices for minor interests" (Singer

Get Access