|
Animals as ends in themselves |
 |
 |
 |
|
Written by <a href='/community/profile/382-laurence'>laurence</a>
|
|
Sunday, 10 November 2002 08:06 |
Article: An Animal's Place, nytimes.com
"Peter Singer's argument is disarmingly simple and, if you accept its premises, difficult to refute. Take the premise of equality, which most people readily accept. Yet what do we really mean by it? People are not, as a matter of fact, equal at all -- some are smarter than others, better looking, more gifted. ''Equality is a moral idea,'' Singer points out, ''not an assertion of fact.'' The moral idea is that everyone's interests ought to receive equal consideration, regardless of ''what abilities they may possess.'' Fair enough; many philosophers have gone this far. But fewer have taken the next logical step. ''If possessing a higher degree of intelligence does not entitle one human to use another for his or her own ends, how can it entitle humans to exploit nonhumans for the same purpose?'' This is the nub of Singer's argument, and right around here I began scribbling objections in the margin. "
related - Compassion for Animals and Interview with animal rights lawyer, Stephen Wise
Trackback(0)
 |
Facebook.com
Twitter.com
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed