Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Argument for animal rights
Ethical theory utilitarianism
Should we use animals for scientific research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Argument for animal rights
Any animal used as a food source, pet, and/or keep in a facility by human must be ethically cared for. The choice to keep, consume and contain animals for our own human benefit is our own. Many people live healthy lives as vegan and/or vegetarians. Sustainable animal use should be keep within limit to not allow affliction place on animals, for their likely service to human, to exceed human demand. For example experiments in which animals are used for testing. Testing should be congruous with the intended audience and results, meaning if animals are not the intended audience they should not be used. Potential physical hardships of the animals must be considered just as they are with humans.
Utilizing animals in biomedical research bring on the utilitarianism and animal rights disputes of animal welfare. Below are some examples from, European Journal of Pharmacology.
…show more content…
The animal rights view denies that we can justify beneficial results by using immoral means (Sandøe et al., 1997), which implies that the interests of one individual should never be sacrificed for the benefits of the other.
(Graham & Prescott,
The essay “Ill-gotten Gains” first appeared in a book called ‘Health Care Ethics’ and was written by Tom Regan, a renowned philosopher, author and animal rights advocate. The essay appeared again in Tom Regan’s best known book called ‘The Case for Animal Rights’ which states Regan’s beliefs regarding animal rights and provides a sound argument as to why animals should not be exploited for our own gain. Tom Regan believes all animal use that benefits humans is morally unacceptable, including for food, entertainment, labour, experiments and research. “Ill-gotten Gains” argues that to be on the right moral path we need to view all individuals with inherent value as a ‘subject of a life’. Regan argues that any practice in which a ‘subject of life’ is used as a resource is immoral, not because of emotion, but because of reason.
Wyckoff, Jason, and M.A Bertz. "The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation? - By Gary L. Francione & Robert Garner." Journal of Applied Philosophy 28.4 (2011): 414-16. Print.
The article mainly focuses on this issue, not mentioning the aspects of animal rights. The authors argue their points well but can have counter-arguments against some
Animal testing has been used for developing and researching cures for medical conditions. For example, the polio vaccine, chemotherapy for cancer, insulin treatment for diabetes, organ transplants and blood transfusions are just some of the important advances that have come from research on animals (“Animal Testing”). Consuming animals for research benefits in developing various treatments and also benefits in discovery better methods for cures. According to the article “Animal Testing”, it says that the underlying rationale for the use of animal testing is that living organisms provide interactive, dynamic systems that scientists can observe and manipulate in order to understand normal and pathological functioning as well as the effectiveness of medical interventions. It relies on the physiological and anatomical similarities between humans and other animals (MacClellan, Joel). Meaning that animals have the same body components and features as humans and is the best thing to research on to better understand the human development. Even though several argue that animal testing is harming the animals, one has to think back to all the benefits that has come from it. There may be a little remorse for endangering animal lives, but realizing how far medicine has come makes it worth the while.
Vivisections, medical research that harms the research subject without providing any benefits to them, is supported by philosophy professor R.G Frey on the basis that the using and killing of animals is morally permissible because humans' quality of life exceeds animals' quality of life. Frey does not disregard the fact that vivisections harm animals, he sees no difference in the pain felt by humans and animals; nonetheless, Frey does not believe that all members of the moral community have lives of equal value. He believes that sacrificing the lives of those with less value is better than sacrificing the lives of those with higher values. Therefore, Frey defends the act of vivisections on the basis that humans' lives are of greater moral value
a. A member of PETA, Tom Reagan, says that animal pain and suffering is part of
Animal testing is an intense contentious matter that has created a division among people; there are those who support and those who are against it. Animal testing, also identified as animal experimentation is when non-human animals are used in conducting experiments, especially in medicine. There are a number of unending debates on whether animal testing should continue or not, as some groups squabble that, it is an unethical process while others argue that it is ethical since it has large benefits on the health of humans. In addition, there is another group that advocates for the use of alternatives, instead of live animals. Although animal testing is considered as an inhumane and an unethical practice, it is crucial
“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality.”(Arthur Schopenhauer)
Millions of animals are used to test consumer products, but they also become victims of experiments for medical research. In The Ethics of Animal Research (2007) both authors state that there have been many medical advances with the development of medicines and treatments as a result of research conducted on animals (para 1). These medical improvements have helped many people be able to enjoy life, but some people still believe that animal research is mean and avoidable .... ... middle of paper ... ...
"The Case For Animal Rights" written by Tom Regan, promotes the equal treatment of humans and non-humans. I agree with Regan's view, as he suggests that humans and animals alike, share the experience of life, and thus share equal, inherent value.
A. A. “The Case Against Animal Rights.” Animal Rights Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Janelle Rohr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1989.
Animals have held an important spot in many of our lives. Some people look at animals as companions and others see them as a means of experimental research and medical advancement. With the interest to gain knowledge, physicians have dissected animals. The ethics of animal testing have always been questioned because humans do not want to think of animals on the same level as humans. Incapable of our thinking and unable to speak, animals do not deserve to be tested on by products and be conducted in experiments for our scientific improvement. Experimentation on animals is cruel, unfair, and does not have enough beneficial results to consider it essential.
Animals are so often forgotten when it comes to the many different levels of basic rights. No, they can’t talk, or get a job, nor can they contribute to society the way humans can. Yet they hold a special place in their owners’ hearts, they can without a doubt feel, show their different emotions, and they can most definitely love. In recent years there has been a massive increase in animal rights awareness, leading to a better understanding and knowledge in the subject of the humane treatment of animals. Where do humans draw the line between the concern of equality, and simple survival?
Animal welfare plays a big role on different areas; how to use animals humanely on laboratories, on animal industries and consumers, on the students especially in the world veterinary medicine and on the religious beliefs of different religions (Heleski, Mertig & Zanella, 2004). Animal Welfare The welfare of an animal can be measured by observing its state of coping with the environment. If an animal failures to cope, then it indicates a poor welfare. Welfare has many dimensions that need to be done in order to meet animal welfare (Broom, 1991; Botreau, Veissier, Bracke, Butterworth & Keeling, 2007). There are recognized ideal states of animal welfare given by the Farm Animal Welfare Council (UK), the “Five Freedoms”.
Therefore, animals should not be used in research or to test the safety of products. Many people believe that animal testing is only morally right if the animals are sacrificed to make products safer for human use and consumption. Others also believe that animal testing is justified because the lives of animals are not as important as a human life, therefore, having no rights. The problem with this reasoning is that the animals’ safety, well-being, and quality of life