Animal Rights: Humans and Other Living Creatures
2/23/2017
1
Humans and Other Living
CreaturesChapter 7
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you w ill be able to:7.1 Explain the different criterion for extending or denying rights to animals.7.2 Evaluate the ethical issues involved in the use of animals for product testing and for scientific research.7.3 Critically evaluate Peter Singer’s Utilitarian argument for animal rights.7.4 Create an argument for or against animal rights.
Overview of Animal Rights
Arguments pertaining to animal rights run the gamut from “They have none” to “They are equal in moral status to humans.” Most reasonable view s, as w ith many issues, fall somew here betw een these two extremes. The analysis of the moral status of animals involves several questions. The first question is w hat, if any, rights they possess. The question of rights is complex, and there are still contentious debates as to w hat rights, if any, humans have, let alone other sentient nonhumans. The second question involves the treatment and use of animals. 2/23/2017
2
Humans use animals in various ways
FoodMedicineResearchCosmeticsClothesSport
Main Philosophical Arguments
Rene DescartesI mmanuel KantU tilitarian arguments
Rene Descartes
Descartes maintained that animals w ere nothing more than unconscious machines.
He felt that an animal’s cry w as akin to the squeaking of a clock that needed oiling. 2/23/2017
3
No Soul, No Rights
On Descartes reading of spiritual scripture, animals lack a soul; if you do not have a soul you do not feel pain or pleasure, therefore, they do not have any rights.
Animal Rights
Descartes:1.If you do not have a soul,Then you do not have rights.2.Animals do not have souls.3.Therefore, Animals do not have rights.
Kant -Animal Rights
1.I f you do not have rationality;Then you do not have Rights.2.Animals do not have rationality.3.Therefore, Animals do not have rights. 2/23/2017
4
Reductio Adsurdum
1.I f you do not have rationality;Then you do not have Rights.2.Babies do not have rationality3.Therefore, Babies do not have rights.
Rationality/ Moral Responsibility
1.I f you do not have rationality; then you do not have Moral Responsibility.2.Animals do not have rationality 3.Therefore, Animals do not have Moral Responsibility.
Utilitarianism: Animal rights
1.I f you have the capacity to feel pain or pleasure, then you have rights.2.Animals have the capacity to feel pain and pleasure. 3.Therefore: Animals have rights. 2/23/2017
5
People have Rights too
1.I f you have the capacity to feel pain or pleasure, then you have rights.2.People have the capacity to feel pain and pleasure.3.Therefore: People have rights.
Crazy Utilitarian Argument
1.People have rights.2.Animals have rights.3.Therefore, people and animals have the same rights.
People are equal to Goats.
Equivocation in the term rights
Equivocation in the use of the term “rights”People have the right to drive and vote,Goats have the same “rights” too. 2/23/2017
6
What Rights do animals have?
People have RightsAnimals have RightsBut it is not specified what rights each have -there is no reason to assume they have the same rights.
Babies = Animals
Babies can’t vote or drive, and yet they have rights - As such, Goats (any animal) have the same rights as Babies.
Babies = Goats
1.Babies have rights.2.Animals have rights.3.Therefore babies and animals have the same rights.
Babies are equal to Goats, cow s, dogs cats…. 2/23/2017
7
Immanuel Kant
“[Animals] are not self -conscious and are there merely as a means to an end. That end is man. … Our duties towards animals are merely indirect duties towards humanity.
Kantian Counter argument - Potential rationality1.I f you have the potential for rationality, then you have rights.2.Babies have the potential for rationality3.Therefore, babies have rights.
Animal Potential Rationality
1.I f you have the potential for rationality,Then you have rights.2.Animals do not have the potential for rationality.3.Therefore, Animals do not have rights. 2/23/2017
8
The Notion Potential Rationality Applied
Mentally handicapped people, fetuses w ith birth defects, people w ith brain injuries, and people in comas or vegetative states all lack the potential for rationality -as such, on this view they lack rights.
Food and Farming
9.7 Billion Animals are killed for food every year in the U SA.95% of these animals are factory Farmed.Factory farms are vast w arehouses w hich are used to raise livestock.
DOWNED ANIMAL PROTECTION ACT
S. 267: DOWNED ANIMAL PROTECTION ACT A Bill to amend the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, to make it unlaw ful for any stockyard ow ner, market agency, or dealer to transfer or market nonambulatory livestock, and for other purposes . (b) U NLAWFU L PRACTI CES -I t shall be unlaw ful for any stockyard ow ner, market agency, or dealer to buy, sell, give, receive, transfer, market, hold, or drag any nonambulatory livestock unless the nonambulatory livestock has been humanely euthanized.'. 2/23/2017
9
Animal testing has led to human deathsAsbestos and Cancer Year that the carcinogenic effects of asbestos w ere suspected, based on clinical (human) studies: 1907 Year that the New York Academy of Sciences assured people that animal studies indicated that there w as nothing to fear from asbestos: 1965 Year that the EPA recommended an immediate ban on asbestos: 1986
Polio
“The w ork on prevention w as long delayed by the erroneous conception of the nature of the human disease based on misleading experimental models of disease in monkeys.”― Dr. Albert Sabin (scientist credited w ith development of polio vaccine, along w ith Dr. Jonas Salk)
Penicillin
“How fortunate w e didn’t have these animal tests in the 1940s, for penicillin w ould probably never been granted a license, and possibly the w hole field of antibiotics might never have been realized.”Sir Alexander Fleming (scientist credited w ith discovering penicillin) 2/23/2017
10
FDA and Animal Testing
FDA Study: Of 198 new medications introduced to the market betw een 1976 to 1985, 52 percent w ere either w ithdraw n or relabeled because of severe side effects not predicted through animal studies.
Rats and Mice
Studies conducted on mice and rats found that 46 percent of chemicals found to be cancer -causing in rats w ere notcancer - causing in mice. Of 20 compounds know n notto cause cancer in humans, 19 caused cancer in mice.
