As I have progressed through this class, my already strong interest in animal ethics has grown substantially. The animal narratives that we have read for this course and their discussion have prompted me to think more deeply about mankind’s treatment of our fellow animals, including how my actions impact Earth’s countless other creatures. It is all too easy to separate one’s ethical perspective and personal philosophy from one’s actions, and so after coming to the conclusion that meat was not something that was worth killing for to me, I became a vegetarian. The trigger for this change (one that I had attempted before, I might add) was in the many stories of animal narratives and their inseparable discussion of the morality in how we treat animals. I will discuss the messages and lessons that the readings have presented on animal ethics, particularly in The Island of Doctor Moreau, The Dead Body and the Living Brain, Rachel in Love, My Friend the Pig, and It Was a Different Day When They Killed the Pig. These stories are particularly relevant to the topic of animal ethics and what constitutes moral treatment of animals, each carrying important lessons on different facets the vast subject of animal ethics. The Island of Doctor Moreau by H.G. Wells focuses on the grisly and disturbing topic of vivisection. While vivisection is rare and taboo in modern time (and illegal without anesthetic), vivisections and dissections were much more common at the time the novel was written (AAVS). Vivisections were used to study animal anatomy and as a replacement for human subjects as human corpses were often difficult and illegal to obtain. Doctor Moreau performs operations on a number of animals ranging from leopards to apes in an attem... ... middle of paper ... ...inder of the cost of our lifestyle, for no one can live a totally cruelty free life. Cruelty will happen whether we wish it to or not—even people who abstain from animal sourced or tested foods and products will inevitably cause some cruelty by simply going about innocent daily life. For example, nearly any driver will eventually hit some animal no matter how hard they try to avoid it. The best one can do is make an honest effort to reduce his or her own impact on other creatures, whether that be by excluding animal products from their diet or seeking out foods from humane farms. Animal narratives are unique in their ability to allow the reader to experience these stories vicariously through the perspective of the animal, encouraging reflection and introspection on how humans treat others, and accordingly promoting empathy towards humankind’s fellow earthlings.
In the article “A change of heart about animals” author Jeremy Rifkin uses rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade humanity in a desperate attempt to at the very least have empathy for “our fellow creatures” on account of the numerous research done in pursuit of animal rights. Rifkin explains here that animals are more like us than we imagined, that we are not the only creatures that experience complex emotions, and that we are not the only ones who deserve empathy.
Factory farming is often a sore spot for American and other first world consciences. Even those that are ethically comfortable with consumption of animal products are often discomfited by the large-scale maltreatment of living creatures that is present in contemporary agribusiness. Writings that are similar to Peter Singer's “Down on the Factory Farm”, which depicts the multitude of unnatural horrors and abuses that billions of farm animals undergo before they are ultimately slaughtered for our use, make up the majority of the commentary on the subject. There seem to be few writers with the audacity to dispute the popular outcry that there is something morally reprehensible in our systematic exploitation of other species. Yet, as Stanley Curtis shows in “The Case for Intensive Farming of Food Animals”, a less emotionally charged examination is likely to be necessary if we have any aspirations of revising the current model into one that is not only more humane, but also sustainable for the environment and for the growing human population. Though our sympathies are immediately swayed by Singer's work, we must remain cognisant that, as Singer himself said, “We can't take our feelings as moral data, immune from rational criticism” (The Lives of Animals 89). Though Curtis's work seems at times overly cold in its utilitarian views, it provides an undoubtedly useful contrast to the call-to-arms of Singer's work. Evaluating them in tandem is likely the best approach to deriving a model that placates our moral dissatisfaction while meeting the requirements set forth by reality.
Wells describes the corrosive effect that unchecked and rampant scientific progress can have on ethics and morality. Moreau’s disregard for inflicting pain upon the animals and for acting morally embodies what many common people from the Victorian Era feared about scientists. Moreau practiced vivisection, the dissection of still living animals, all for scientific progress: “The creatures I had seen were not men, had never been men. They were animals—humanised animals—triumphs of vivisection.” (Wells 65). By vivisecting animals for scientific discovery, Moreau demonstrates how morality can be abandoned in the wake of scientific progress. The Island of Doctor Moreau also conveys how intellectualism can be morally corrupting. Throughout the story, Moreau justifies his cruel actions by attributing them to science and curiosity: "You cannot imagine the strange colourless delight of these intellectual desires. The thing before you is no longer an animal, a fellow-creature, but a problem." (Wells 69). The Doctor once again shows how in his quest for attaining scientific knowledge he disregards morals and acts inhumanly cruel to the victims of his experimentation. To conclude, The Island of Doctor Moreau is used by H.G. Wells to criticize and expose the lack of morality in some parts of Victorian sciences such as
How would you like it if your skin were used to create an article of clothing? Or if you were tested on in a lab experiment just to be killed off afterwards? That’s a challenge that a majority of animals have to face every day. It seems as if cruel deaths are the fate of most animals nowadays. Richard Connell’s short story, “The Most Dangerous Game,” revolves around Sanger Rainsford, a hunter who later discovers the wrong in killing animals. “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell could be used to oppose animal cruelty.
Foer, Jonathan Safran. "Eating Animals." Journal of Value Inquiry 45.3 (2011): 359-363. Philosopher's Index. Web. 21 Mar. 2014.
The ethical treatment of animals is a hotly debated concept with many views on how animals should be treated varying across the spectrum. The primary concern behind the vast majority of these debates comes from how we view the moral standing of animals. Generally these can be grouped into three distinct categories, moral equality, direct but unequal, and finally indirect theories (Willson, 2015). In this paper I will attempt to briefly explore and give consideration to all of these areas and some of the differing viewpoints within them.
Billions of animals are being slaughtered, abused, and harmed every year; causing enormous amounts of pain, suffering and distress upon them. It is wrong for humans to cause extended harm to animals for no compelling reason, for the fact that they have moral statuses. We have obligations to animals, and these are not simply grounded in human interests. However, the issues of moral status and equal consideration are far more fundamental and far-reaching in practical impact as DeGrazia have stated. (38) Animals have as much moral status and rights as humans do, and are most definitely worthy of our consideration in their lives.
Whether on the farm, at home, or at the dinner table, animals play an important role in everyday human life. They serve as a source of livelihood, entertainment, inspiration, and of course food and clothing to people all across the world. Yet animals can exist independent from people and, as living beings, they arguably have interests separate and apart from their utility to humanity. However, society is increasingly faced with legal, ethical, and economic dilemmas about the position for animals and the extent to which their interests should be respected, even when those interests conflict with what is best for humans. All animals should be treated respectfully but they are not equal to humans. However, animals need to have the Animal Bill of Rights because it can stop animal abuse, unnecessary animal experiments, and the death of many innocent creatures, but cannot have equal rights as humans have because we cannot ignore human suffering and focus only on animals rights.
Michael Pollan presents many convincing arguments that strengthen his position on whether slaughtering animals is ethical or not. He believes that every living being on this planet deserves an equal amount of respect regardless of it being an animal or human, after all humans are also animals. “An Animal’s place” by Michael Pollan is an opinionated piece that states his beliefs on whether animals should be slaughtered and killed to be someone’s meal or not. In his article, Pollan does not just state his opinions as a writer but also analyzes them from a reader’s point of view, thus answering any questions that the reader might raise. Although Pollan does consider killing and slaughtering of animals unethical, using environmental and ethical
The ugly truth is that animals are dying at the hands of their owners everyday, some in very violent ways that can be avoidable given the right solution. Slaughterhouses, puppy mills, dog fighting, and so on, are just a few examples of how animals are being treated badly by people. Animal cruelty is a form of violence which, un...
It is acceptable to use animals for certain human requirements such as food as long as the animal is raised in a humane way, treated in a morally permissible manner during its lifetime, and killed using a painless method. In conclusion, while human beings are given a privileged place over animals in the natural hierarchy of morally significant beings, it is not permissible to suggest that animals do not deserve moral status. Aristotle’s views that non-human animals do not possess the capacity to reason and, therefore, should be denied moral status should be disregarded in favor of Bentham’s view that non-human animals have the capability to perceive pain and pleasure, whether or not they can verbally communicate these feelings, as well as the capability of suffering. Therefore, they should be regarded in an obligatory manner and treated with moral respect or status.
The words may be over exaggerated but that’s the whole point, to make the reader feel the animals pain, make them feel what it would be like having to live in their shoes. This piece of writing is trying to persuade the reader to stop and think about animal cruelty and what is truly happening to the animals out there. It is trying to persuade the reader to stand up for what is right.
The process for deciding on a product was easy. I simply thought to myself, why not volunteer so that it could go on my resume and then also can count as an grade for my capstone. My capstone product is pretty simple. I volunteer at the St.Louis County Animal Care and Control, when ever I have the free time. So far I spent 12 hours there. It will be super easy for me to get 8 more hours. I don’t do much there which sucks because i’m about to get my vet assistant certification in a few months, which means I know way more about animals then probably the other volunteers do. A typical day volunteering at the animal shelter is I park my truck, sign in, and grab my name tag (now I don’t have one since I lost it and too scared to ask for another one).
There has been abundant support testifying for the complicated and influential bonds among people and other animals, both positive and negative. It’s not an uncommon opinion that the welfare of animals is of ethical importance. Numerous individuals believe that imposing unnecessary pain on animals is immoral. Some individual’s actual handling of animals is anything but them having genuine concern for their discomforts. Everyday a great number of animals are killed for food, amusement, and clothing. Some animals are commonly held in appalling surroundings; they are imprisoned in isolated areas. Animals are often utilized in medical experiments to study the results of toxins, drugs, radiation, and frequently destroyed after studies are completed; if the experiments performed on them didn’t kill them first. Animal welfare is a worldwide concern influencing human wellbeing, societal growth, poverty, and ecological maintenance.
Nussbaum, MC 2006, ‘The moral status of animals’, The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 3, pp. 1-6.