Speciesism

The term specicism, popularised by Peter Singer, is used to refer to a prejudice in the treatment of species that favours one’s own species above others. Singer proposes that there is a similar gravity between speciesism, a relatively unknown and uncommon term, and racism, which carries a lot of weight when used in modern society. I believe this stems from Singer’s perception that semantically they are the same. If someone is to assume they are superior to another based on their own race compared

Speciesism has developed from the same ideas that legitimize the limited category of ‘human’. According to Wikipedia ‘Speciesism is the assignment of different values, rights, or special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership. The term speciesism is a term used by animal rights activists and more or less means that animals like humans have rights and can not be used against their will for testing and other purposes that could harm the animal. In today’s world

idea that all humans are born equal has been something that has been almost installed in our minds. However, in the eyes of Peter Singer, we as humans are constantly violating our own moral code in the way we treat animals. Singer refers to this as speciesism and compares our treatment of animals to the same way sexists and racists treat those who they deem inferior. He also argues that the grounds on which they base their prejudice on are equally fragile. He illustrates this by comparing speciesists

discrimination of one other due to their racial origin, usually involving the idea of inferiority. Specicism, is considered to be carrying a bias nature to the species to which one belongs. [Lafollette, Hugh and Shanks, Niall (1996). "The Origin of Speciesism"] Singer draws parallels between specicism and racism through comparing the grounds on which whose interests and suffering takes precedence. Singer believes that discarding the moral status of animal concerns in their exploitation as they are not

Speciesism is an undeniable prejudice focused on by the likes of Peter Singer and Shelly Kagan. The general accepted definition of speciesism is the assumption of superiority to humans which leads to the exploitation of animals. Singer hones in on the idea of speciesism and uses it to describe giving preference to our own species over another, in the absence of morally relevant differences. In more recent times the rising prevalence around animal ethics, in the world itself as well as in the realm

Speciesism Another topic of prejudice portrayed in the novel, which was also in our text, is that of speciesism. According to McGraw-Hill and Plous, a “common way people reduce conflict over their use of animals is to acknowledge that animals feel pain but to deny that animals are intelligent or self-aware” (521). In Wicked, the relationship between humans and animals is unique from our world since in the world of Oz there is a sub-group of animals, called Animals, which we do not have. The group

handicaps, in which animals exhibit higher levels of intelligence and moral capabilities than humans. Singer is adamant that speciesism is baseless because there are no consistent characteristics with which determination of superiority, in any sense of the word, is possible. Hence speciesism is completely irrational. Yet Singer fails to acknowledge the innate quality of speciesism. Singer is clear in his opinion that when measuring and comparing interests, the owner of the interests (and their species)

Even though Singer uses speciesism to explain the lack of empathy towards animals, a counterargument to his theory exists in Marina Keegan’s essay “Why We Care About Whales.” Keegan points out that a tremendous amount of money goes towards the rescue of beached whales when it could go towards helping humanity and other more dire issues. The question becomes whether or not our inability to stop the mass consumption of meat is actually because speciesism makes it so we don’t care about the rights or

INSERT HOOK The topic of animal liberation is not typically an object of discussion. Most likely because people don’t understand what animals need to be liberated from. Peter Singer is a utilitarian philosopher. Peter Singer’s “Animal Liberation” offers a fascinating view on how humans perceive themselves in comparison to animals. The article examines the tyranny of humans over animals (non-humans). Singer believes humans need to expand their moral horizons so that the mistreatment of animals is

PHILOSOPHY 106 - Is the use of Animals in Biomedical Research Morally Justified? Animals have been treated immorally since the beginning of time, this is shown by hunting, farming, trapping, testing of products and biomedical research etc. As humans, majority of us claim animals as our resources as we use them for eating, making clothing, (leather and fur jackets, shoes) working animals, as a means of transport, animal testing etc. In this essay I will discuss the use of animals in biomedical research