Animal Rights Zone

Fighting for animal liberation and an end to speciesism

Animals, Moral Status of

Oscar Horta

Introduction: It is now widely assumed that all and only human beings merit full moral consideration, that human interests count for more than similar interests of other creatures. Thus, if a human being feels exactly the same pain as a nonhuman animal, then barring some other morally relevant consideration, ending the human’s pain is morally more important. However, even many who claim that human interests take moral priority think that (at least some) nonhuman animals have some interests that we should consider morally, even if they also think these interests are relatively minor.

Given the widespread acceptance of this view, it is not surprising that we routinely use nonhuman animals in multiple ways. We use them for fur, leather, and other clothing materials. We use them to entertain us: we watch them fight, race, and perform at circuses, we keep them in zoos, and we employ them as objects of sport in some forms of hunting and fishing. We train them to assist disabled humans. We use them to educate our children in school experiments. We test drugs and other consumer products on them; we use them as experimental research subjects (see animal experimentation). Although these uses consume millions of animals worldwide each year, by far our most substantial use of animals is for food, whether in commercial fishing, farming (see vegetarianism and veganism), or in some private hunting and fishing.

Critics claim that these uses of nonhuman animals reflect an unjustified bias in favor of our own species, what has been called “speciesism.” This gives us a way to frame the central issues of this essay. Is the claim that human interests morally count for more than similar nonhuman animal interests justified? Even if human interests do morally count for more, should we nonetheless morally consider nonhuman animals’ interests? If we should consider their interests, even a bit, how does that alter how we should treat them? Finally, there are two subsidiary moral issues: are we justified in favoring some nonhuman animals over others, and how do we resolve conflicts between the interests of nonhuman animals and the environment?

Please click this link to view and read the .pdf: Animals, Moral Status of

The index of ARZone's online library of academic papers is here

Views: 130

Reply to This

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

ARZone Podcasts!

Please visit this webpage to subscribe to ARZone podcasts using iTunes

or

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Follow ARZone!

Please follow ARZone on:

Twitter

Google+

Pinterest

A place for animal advocates to gather and discuss issues, exchange ideas, and share information.

Creative Commons License
Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) by ARZone is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at www.arzone.ning.com.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at www.arzone.ning.com.

Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) Disclaimer

Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) is an animal rights site. As such, it is the position of ARZone that it is only by ending completely the use of other animal as things can we fulfill our moral obligations to them.

Please read the full site disclosure here.

Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) Mission Statement

Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) exists to help educate vegans and non-vegans alike about the obligations human beings have toward all other animals.

Please read the full mission statement here.

Members

Events

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by Animal Rights Zone.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Google+