Primates And Personhood Summary

For many years there has been an ongoing debate on whether or not animals should be given rights, even there own bill of rights. Some who are against the animal bill of rights argue that testing products on animals is important to the safety of humans. Others who want the new bill of rights claim that animals have feelings and that science is treating them inhumanely. Animal activists also add that animals are intelligent beings and are aware of how they are treated. Based on science proving animal activists correct on many of their points, this calls for a new bill of rights, in the United States, especially written for the protection and care of wild and domestic animals.

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.

In the article, “Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and ´Dignity´ to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?¨, written by Ed Yong, who explains the moral but unclear delma of granting Great Apes rights. Extending from Spain to the U.S., the Great Ape Project (GAP) fights for these basic sets of moral and legal rights for apes. The problem is that apes, although genetically similar to humans are still viewed as simple animals. Which makes the ability to give these non-human animals, human like rights unnecessary as it would to give rights to dogs or rats. The U.S. has also passes the Great Ape Protection Act, which stop any harmful experience to apes. Consequently also stopping any further understanding of underlying biological mechanisms,

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.

Throughout history, humans have utilized nonhuman animals for the benefit of mankind. This tendency increased as civilization developed, and presently, necessitated by staggering population growth and technological progress, human use of animals has skyrocketed. We eat them, we breed them, we use them as test subjects. Some people have begun to question the ethics of it all, sparking a debate on animal treatment and whether or not they have rights. In a paper on the subject, Carl Cohen lays out his definition of rights, explains their relationship with obligations, and uses these ideas to present the argument that manifests clearly in his piece’s title, “Why Animals Have No Rights”. THESIS

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 the article “Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research” it was mentioned that “we should extend rights to a wide range of nonhuman animals. All creatures that can feel pain should have a basic moral status” (Yong). Anything with a beating heart has the ability to feel pain, so they should have someone or something protecting them from feeling unnecessary pain. The reason that it should not go to the extent of humans is because animals do not perform the civil duties that humans often do. This is why Hiasl, the chimpanzee, who had an owner fighting to get him granted legal citizenship lost his

This paper aims to study the traits of non-human primates. By observing two types of primates including Common Squirrel Monkey (Saimiri sciureus) and Western Gorillas (Gorilla Gorillas), I try to find out their characteristics, pattern of their behavior, and differences between these two primate species. Especially, characteristics and behavior such as social interaction, food acquisition and intelligence will be discussed and compared in this paper. In order to enhance the persuasiveness of my observation, I recorded and examined at least 25 distinct characteristics of both Common Squirrel Monkeys and Western Gorillas. It is also helpful for me to compare these two primates. Apart from exploring the primates’ traits and differentiation between them, this paper will discuss the effects of captivity. How being in captivity and on display in a zoo would influence their behaviors and emotions? The observation was a great success and I have successfully derived with a hypothesis base on our observing data. The ultimate goal of this paper is arousing humans’ awareness of the importance of studying primates.

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.

There is some great evidence for the argument that primates have their own culture, so it is no wonder that it is getting harder for people to argue that they do not. There are plenty of pictures of primates hugging each other, laughing, and even making tools. The more I read about primates the more I see how similar they are to humans. Chimps use grooming as a way of social reconciliation, as well as helping each other out. Humans were also thought to be one of the only species to engage in sexual activity without the sole cause being conception. Primates have been observed engaging in sexual acts that tend to strengthen social bonds and defuse conflict. Scientists have also taught primates how to use sign language as a means of communication.

There are many species that belong as a part of the Primates; not only in today’s world, but also in a world before Homo Sapiens became advanced enough to be able to differentiate anthropomorphic traits in other species. To identify these species, specific analyses of a wide variety of characteristics had to occur. One of these characteristics being detention, or “the sizes, shapes, and number of an animal’s teeth” (Lavenda and Schultz 100). Looking at skulls of Primates that are no longer around, or maybe even still existing, can sometimes be hard to distinguish; at least if you are still learning about the shapes and sizes of each species. When unsure of which group the skull of a Primate belongs to, looking at the number and shapes of

It also says that all these restrictions are just slowing down and discouraging scientific research. Jane Goodall brings up JoJo and the difference between wild chimps and chimpanzees used in scientific study. She states that chimps don’t benefit the study of AIDs because they rarely exhibit symptoms. Jane Goodall says that the chimps are prisoners serving for a crime they didn’t commit. That the animals are so like humans that the need to be with their families in the wild and shouldn’t be treated in a

The idea of animal rights has been around for centuries. Even decades ago, people were taking action for the welfare of animals. Marc Bekoff and Ned Hettinger share this idea all the way back in 1994 when they said that there is evidence that scientist are concerned with animal welfare by acknowledge that they use the guidelines in place to protect animals during research, in order to have their work published (Bekoff 219). Guidelines are the basis for the moral and ethical treatment of animals. Each person may have his or her own standard, but having a standard among the entire population ensures the welfare of the animals. Unfortunately, these standards are not at a level to where the animals are being protected. Many animals in captivity are treated in ways that would shock the average person. Orcas for example, are starved until they do the desired task (Cowperthwaite). This form of operant condition can lead to success, but often leads to resentment and hostility towards the trainers.

In our world, protests occur each day on the issues of animal cruelty and human rights, but when the issues are put together which will reign over the other? The author Peter Singer of “All Animals are Equal” and “Tools for Research” presents his argument for determining when animal experiments are justified. The author starts his paper with a counter argument, questioning if one would be willing to let thousands of people die if those people could be saved by experimentation on a single animal. The answer is a unanimous no; in our culture we value human life over everything else. The author follows by asking the reader if they would be prepared to carry out their experiments on humans who are mentally retarded or orphaned babies, if that