Preview

The Similarities Between Darwin, Species And Morality, By James Rachels

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
679 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Similarities Between Darwin, Species And Morality, By James Rachels
Darwin
Species and morality
James Rachels seeks to amplify the ideology between morality and Darwin’s moral treatment of organisms of different species. He says that Darwin advocated for treatment of both humans and non-humans equally without discrimination. This despite his continued use of non-humans for investigative research according to his son was the resultant effect of distaste for cruelty against animals as well as slavery. Rachels explains that Darwin’s theory of morality seems to interject the traditional view of morality.
The traditional view of morality was far much inclined to the perception that human beings had more special inherent moral characteristics and the fact the being is human. Rachels forms a thesis upon Darwin’s opinion that the gradual illumination of men’s mind will disqualify the traditional view of morality as a mere fallacy. To provide a basis of the fallacy Rachels demystifies this referring to later works of Darwin: the descent of man (1871) and the expression of the emotions in man and animals (1872). The underlying explanation to this works and which Darwin wanted to elucidate
…show more content…
This argument is based on more concrete facts that there are more differences and similarities between humans and non-humans. Therefore the rejection of speciesism is attributable to an historical continuing process. In the first stage traditional morality was accepted due to the general world view and acceptance. In the second stage the earth revealed not to be the Centre of the universe as such its special treatment lost meaning and Darwin sums that humans as well as animals are of the same order. Thirdly, the world view on morality having lost meaning on morality it calls for reexamination. Only will it sound firm if new support will be staged as solid morality cannot be overturned

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Morality is a uniquely human characteristic. As it is something we have created but cannot touch. We can assume it is housed in the inner workings of our mind. Morality moves us to action, but we must first determine its origin. The mind has the…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Kant felt that humans have no duty to animals. He stated ““Animals are not self-conscious and are there merely as a means to an end. The end is man.” According to Immanuel Kant, humans have no direct duties to animals. Kant’s moral view of animals is that if it benefits humankind then the right of the animal should have no regard at all. Kant believed in science, he believed that if an animal had a scientific…

    • 1603 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Speciesism is the idea that simply being human is enough to have superior moral rights to non-human animals. Those who value speciesism might agree with the views of Bernard Williams who claims that, “we humans are doing the judging, we are entitled to prefer our own kind” (Singer 572). William essentially adopts the “whose side are you on” argument to moral status. Singer denounces this argument by applying it to people who suffer from severe cognitive disabilities. He asserts that if an alien is capable of understanding and communicating, singer has “much more in common with [the alien] that [he does] with someone of my species who is mentally retarded and has no capacity for verbal communication” (Singer 573). This same argument can be applied to nonhuman animals. If a nonhuman animal is capable of comprehension and communication, that animal has much more in common with human beings than someone with severe mental retardation. The “whose side are you on” argument simply falls short since not all human beings are capable of equal understanding and communication. Singer asserts that simply being a part of the Homo Sapien species does not entitle someone of a higher moral status than being a member of the Pan Troglodytes species. Essentially, Singer argues that moral status must be based on cognitive ability instead of perceived intrinsic…

    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Choosing what morality is determined by, may be the problem in its own-self. Great men have contemplated where morality really lies, though many of them have took another's work to serve as the guide to strive for their own progression. Through the progression of these studies one can conclude that happiness is a focal point in the works of many great men. It seems to be one of the basis of which humanity uses as their definition of morality.…

    • 848 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of her most intriguing essays is that of Darwinism. Darwinism is one of the most widely admired and taboo-bounded idols of this age and time. To say that Robinson had a difficult task writing against it is an understatement. However, she does so with great reason and imagination. She provides firsthand evidence and realistic arguments that is very unique in this time.…

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Didion's on Morality

    • 782 Words
    • 4 Pages

    What is it that forms and drives our “moral behaviors”? Are we born with a basic sense of morality or do we develop a set of moral “social codes” to keep society from falling into chaos and anarchy? In her essay “On Morality,” Joan Didion dissects what lies beneath the surface of humanity’s morality. By recounting several stories and historical events, she shows that morality at its basic “most primitive level” is nothing more than “our loyalties to the ones we love,” everything else is subjective.…

    • 782 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “The value of life is a notoriously difficult ethical question.” (1993, p. 62). However, like all utilitarians, Singer applies the 'greatest happiness principle' in order to begin addressing this dilemma. Utilitarian ethics dictates that we make decisions in such a way so as they result in the greatest net utility (or happiness) for the greatest number and this Singer regards as being the true only measure of good or ethical behaviour. Singer contends that there is no reason why such considerations considerations should not be extended to other animals. The term 'speciesism' was first popularised by Singer to label the prejudice of privileging humans and their interests over those of other animals. Singer's utilitarian viewpoint is grounded in what he commonly…

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Singer – animals can experience pleasure/pain so they deserve our moral consideration. Speciesism is an injustice parallel to racism and sexism.…

    • 459 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Cited: Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man in Relation to Sex. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1981. Print.…

    • 2150 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    believed in the harmony of the world, and it was Darwin himself who said that…

    • 1989 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Although animal moral considerability has peaked the interest of many contemporary philosophers, such as James Rachels and Peter Singer, the question is really an age-old question that can be traced back to Plato and Aristotle. Immanuel Kant has probed the question of whether an animal has moral considerability. Kant continuously makes the distinction between humans and animals throughout his best-known contributions to moral philosophy. Therefore, I will address and present the counter-argument to the charge of speciesism, one of critical arguments of the animal rights movement, through a Kantian lens.…

    • 1830 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Rhetorical Devices

    • 1472 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Perhaps the most important rhetorical aspect of each paper is the overall structure and order of the author’s ideas as they present their opinions and their purpose to the audience. Throughout Speciesism and Moral Status, Singer presents his information in a very specific way, beginning with the controversial statement that not all humans are above animals, and that there should be a…

    • 1472 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    An argument for extending the principle of equality beyond our own species is simple. It amounts to no more then a clear understanding of the nature of the principle of equal consideration of interests. This principle implies that our concern for others ought not to depend on what they are like or what abilities they posses. It is on this basis that we are able to say that…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Nietzsche: the Conscience

    • 1568 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In his second essay of the Geneaology of Morals, Nietzsche attempts to identify and explain the origin of the conscience. He does not adopt the view of the conscience that is accepted by the “English Psychologists”, such as Bentham, J. Mill, J.S. Mill and Hume, as the result of an innate moral feeling. Rather, it is his belief that the moral content of our conscience is formed during childhood under the influence of society. Nietzsche defines the conscience as an introspective phenomenon brought about by a feeling of responsibility, in which one analyzes their own morality due to the internalization of the values of society. This definition holds the position that the conscience is not something innate to humans, rather it has arisen through evolution. In light of this, this paper will give insight into how Nietzsche reaches this conclusion, as well as what results from it. In order to do this there will be discussion of guilt, punishment, the will to power and implications from society.…

    • 1568 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Most of us believe that we are entitled to treat members of other species in ways which would be considered wrong if inflicted on members of our own species. We kill them for food, keep them confined, use them in painful experiments. The moral philosopher has to ask what relevant difference justifies this difference in…

    • 4954 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Powerful Essays