Preview

Speciesism And Equality Of Animals, By Peter Singer

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
229 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Speciesism And Equality Of Animals, By Peter Singer
In his essay "Speciesism and Equality of Animals", Peter Singer accurately portrays his distraught outlook on the tendency for human beings to prioritize their desires over the dignity of other forms of life, a term also referred to as "speciesism." Singer's argument distinctively highlights the gruesome practices that animals are forced to partake in such as "pigs being reared in cages" or dogs receiving treatments of shock for a psychology journal (207). With these examples and many more, Singer strongly convinces the audience that all animal testing should be eliminated and frowned upon as a common practice. However, despite providing these examples that illustrate the flaws in speciesism, Singer fails to bring to light the benefits animal
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Peter Singer's Argumentative Essay: The Rights Of Animals
    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Peter Singer's Argumentative Essay: The Rights Of Animals

    Animals deserve rights because just like humans, they feel excruciating pain, suffer and have feelings. One would argue that animals don’t experience emotions? But the answer is of course they do. It is emotions that allow animals to display various behavior patterns. According to the theory of utilitarianism, all sentient beings should be given consideration in the society and this includes both animals and humans. Also, animals cannot speak for themselves and for this reason they should be treated equally, protected and given the same respect as human beings. Peter singer’s approach also supports the argument on equal consideration in that animals deserve the same respect as human beings but just in a different view. In today’s society humans exploit animals for milk, meat, fur, scientific experimentation etc. and animals are constantly injured or killed. Their pain and sufferings should be taken into consideration, as this unjust treatment is morally unacceptable. Similarly speciesism is an…

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Analyzing Jeremy Rifkin's Article 'A Change Of Heart About Animals'
    • 838 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Analyzing Jeremy Rifkin's Article 'A Change Of Heart About Animals'

    Jeremy Rifkin 's article, “A Change of Heart About Animals” argues that animals are more like humans than we imagine and as a result should be treated with the care that they deserve. Rifkin develops and supports his argument using facts about the animals and these facts end up touching hearts. In order for Rifkin to get his point across he uses a smart technique by using pathos and plays with the emotions of his audience. Rifkin loves animals and his passion and love evokes emotions that the audience can feel. Animals can feel and have emotions similar to ours. in agreement with Rifkin, I argue that it is wrong and inhumane to kill or abuse animals because they feel, they deserve to have space and should be valued as much as humans are It is wrong no animal should be killed due to abuse or testing, it is wrong and inhumane.…

    • 838 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Summary Of The Article 'A Change Of Heart About Animals'
    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Summary Of The Article 'A Change Of Heart About Animals'

    Animal testing is cruel and barbaric. In the article "A change of heart about animals" by Jeremy Rifkin, featured in the los Angeles Times, Rifkin discussed how scientists have discovered that animals are not far different from humans. The studies show that animals have similar emotions and reactions when experiencing such emotions in times of distress or fear. Despite these finding, animals are still continually tested on for products and other experiments in order to see what the result would be.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Tom Regan's Position
    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Tom Regan's Position

    An Argumentative essay that looks at and breaks down the philosophical difference between Tom Regan’s position on Animal rights and, Peter Singer’s position on Animal liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals.…

    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Tom Regan Animal Rights
    • 1452 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Tom Regan Animal Rights

    Animals contain traits that humans acquire into their everyday lives, yet humans find different approaches to make these animals suffer on a day to day basis. Tom Regan, author of Animal Rights, Human Wrongs, describes various situations in which humans hunt animals for pleasure while Stephen Rose, author of Proud to be a Speciesist, illustrates why a speciesist like himself would use animals for research. Tom Regan’s describes his main point as to why humans would want to slaughter such precious animals to have them for resources. On the opposing side of the argument, Stephen Rose’s argument states that animal cruelty cannot be considered wrong because “Many human diseases and disorders are found in other mammals…” (Rose 553). Although Regan…

    • 1452 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Steinbock Vs Singer
    • 722 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Steinbock Vs Singer

    He dismisses the claim that the prospect of human wellbeing resulting from such experiments supercedes pain and suffering, which are inflicted to the animals. Instead he bluntly suggests that if we to consider ourselves more valuable only based on our intelligence, then those members of society, who by the virtue of their mental capacity stand on the lower scale of the intellegence abilities, would be less entitled to the fulfillment of their basic human rights. Singer points out that if our value was measured only in amount of our intelligence, then a person with lower IQ would have similar, or even lower, value with an animal, who hold some intellegence abilities. Therefore, he claims, it would be equally justifiable to use mentally challenged or animals in the research projects. Evidently, Singer dismisses the simple factual difference between the two examples. A random healthy adult person, an infant, who is orphan, or a mentally incapacitated, share the same certain privileges just by a sheer reason of belonging to the same group - human race, and are superior to a representative of a non-human animal world, no matter how intelligent in some sense it would…

    • 722 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Peter Singer Argument
    • 1055 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Peter Singer Argument

    2. In “Animal Liberation”, Peter Singer argues that human suffering and animal suffering should be given equal consideration. He believes that a lot of our modern practices are speciesist, and that they hold our best interest above all else. The only animals that we give equal consideration are humans. He questions our reasonings for giving equal consideration to all members to our species, because, some people are more superior than others, in terms of intelligence or physical strength. Humans value themselves over…

    • 1055 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Phil. outline
    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Phil. outline

    B. Singer then turns to the substantive issue of “what are the implications of utilitarianism for our treatment of animals?”…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Factory Farmed Food Is Wrong
    • 506 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Factory Farmed Food Is Wrong

    Singer states that “If we are not willing to inflict that degree of pain on a newborn baby, then it is morally wrong to inflict an equivalent degree of pain on a nonhuman animal”(Class notes, Module 07, Pg 7). Singer means that if we would not slap a baby why slap a animal and so on. So why do something to an animal if we would not do it to a human. Singer also makes another good point, “that we ought not to cause nonhuman animals to suffer if we would balk about causing humans that same degree of suffering if instituted, would force us to make radical changes changes in our diets, in our use of animals for experimentation and so forth”(Class notes, Module 07, Pg 7). Singer's point shows that if we did stop buying factory farmed food, Americans that do eat the food would have to make a completely different change in their appetite like going…

    • 506 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Summary of Peter Singer's 'All Animals are Equal'
    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Summary of Peter Singer's 'All Animals are Equal'

    In Peter Singers All Animals Are Equal, he claims we should give the same respect the lives of non human animals as we give the lives of humans and that all animals human and non-human are in fact equal. I agree with him because there is no reason as to why animals should not get the same rights and respect as us. Animals have interest, when these are similar to ours, or their pain is on a similar level why give them less consideration. All human and animals have similar feelings such as loving something or feeling pain when they get hurt. I agree with Singer in what he says when animals should be given the same respect and treated equally.…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Bonnie Steinbock -- Speciesism and the Idea of Equality
    • 4954 Words
    • 20 Pages

    Bonnie Steinbock -- Speciesism and the Idea of Equality

    Speciesism and the Idea of Equality Author(s): Bonnie Steinbock Source: Philosophy, Vol. 53, No. 204 (Apr., 1978), pp. 247-256 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3749431 Accessed: 05/08/2010 08:38…

    • 4954 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Benefits Of Animal Testing
    • 486 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Benefits Of Animal Testing

    Animal testing is an expression that the vast majority has heard yet is maybe still uncertain of precisely what is included. Whether it is called animal testing, animal experimentation or animal research, it alludes to the experimentation completed on creatures. It is utilized to survey the wellbeing and adequacy of everything from medicine to beautifying agents, and also seeing how the human body functions. While supporters trust it is a vital practice, those contradicted to creature testing trust that it includes the torment and Suffering of Animals.…

    • 486 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Immanuel Kant's Views On Animal Rights
    • 1603 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Immanuel Kant's Views On Animal Rights

    Singer's Utilitarianism does give some sense of moral equality between humans and animals. He felt that animals have identical interests that are equally morally important as humans and that they must be treated with equal concern. Singer says: "Speciesism. . . the belief that we are entitled to treat members of other species in a way in which it would be wrong to treat members of our own…

    • 1603 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Should Animal Testing Be Banned?
    • 1005 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Should Animal Testing Be Banned?

    Throughout history, animal experimentation has played an important role in leading to new discoveries and human benefits. However, what many people tend to forget are the great numbers of animal subjects that have suffered serious harm during the process of experimentation. Many people are believed to be ignorant or misunderstand the nature of the lives that animals actually live, and are unable to understand the actual laboratory procedures and techniques. Other than the philosophical questions that arise, moral questions are the main reason why many animal right activists want it banned in every country. I feel that to this day, there should be no good reason why any living things should be subjected to this cruel punishment and unwanted torture just for serving another being’s needs. Animal testing should be banned under some circumstances; we can improve the situation by using alternative ways such as replacement, reduction, and refinement according to International Society from Applied Ethology.…

    • 1005 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Why Animal Testing: Should Animals Be Used As Test Subject?
    • 814 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Why Animal Testing: Should Animals Be Used As Test Subject?

    Over 100 million animals suffer and die in the U.S. every year in cruel chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics tests as well as in medical training exercises and curiosity-driven medical experiments at universities (PETA n.d). These animals are locked in barren cages with fear shown in their eyes waiting for the day when all of the misery will stop. Animals which are being tested are beautiful creatures that have the right to live normally and regularly; there is no excuse for exposing the lives of these animals to sufferance. In fact, animal experimentation is considered as a bad science and loss of ethics. Moreover, the animals do not have the ability to claim their rights,…

    • 814 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics