Assignment 9 Animals
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Texas, Arlington *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1304
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by ChefLemur2494
Assignment 9: Animals
1.
After reading the first two paragraphs (on page 169), in your opinion: (a) Are animals more like
George, or more like the pebble; (b) Please define moral status (yes, again); (c) Do animals have
full, partial, or zero moral status?; (d) If they have partial or zero moral status, is it okay to test
them in the manner described, in the third paragraph?
Animals are more like George because they are living creatures who are capable of suffering. Moral
Status questions is a thing worthy of moral consideration, with regard to its individual treatment by
others?
Animals have partial moral status because we do not treat them in the same manner as
humans, however, we do treat them better than nonliving objects. I would consider the manner of
treatment in the third paragraph to be the inappropriate treatment of an animal as the animal suffering.
2.
It is suggest that moral status can be obtained several distinct ways: (a) simply by being a human
being, (b) having a future like ours (FLO), and (c) being a “person.” What traits does the author
suggest we consider in determining if a person or a thing has “personhood” status that makes
them “worthy of moral consideration” (i.e. moral status)?
(pp. 169-170)
If they are capable of suffering, rights and responsibilities, ad if they were created with self awareness.
3.
What are “moral patients”? Are they persons?
If so, how is this determined?
Do they have
moral status?
(p. 170)
Subjects of moral concern or consideration, such as infants and “retarded” adults.
4.
What moral are moral agents? What responsibility, if any, do they have?
A person who has the ability to discern right from wrong and are responsible for speaking on behalf of
moral patients.
5.
Do you agree or disagree that the Environment (as whole) is a moral patient? Assuming that it is
a moral patient, who are its moral agents?
Yes, the environment is a moral patient. All living entities with greater moral standing are the
environment's moral agents.
6.
In the article, Peter Singer suggests a simplistic approach to determining moral status: “the
ability to suffer.” What does the author suggest about the distinction between the suffering of
one thing over another; such as, human animals (human beings) v. non-human animals
(animals)? (p. 170, bottom-left paragraph)
There is no distinction between the suffering of human beings and non-human animals as the ability to
suffer is a universal characteristic that is not limited to a specific species.
7.
Please explain the difference between the Consequentialists (Utilitarianism) v. Deontologists
arguments for (against) using non-human animals for scientific experimentation. (p. 170, right
column, 1st and 2nd full paragraphs)
Deontologists argue that there are things we can’t do to creatures with moral standing if the action has a
sustainable benefit for others. Consequentialists' argument is that we can use nonhuman animals for our
purpose if the benefit of using them outweighs the cost.
8.
In Peter Singer’s, All Animals Are Equal, what does he mean when he suggest the “principle of
equality”? (p. 172)
It suggests that we make this mental switch in our attitudes and practices towards animals and members
of species other than our own.
9.
Considering Singer’s discussion of Mary Wollstonecraft, the treatment of women, and the
comparison to “brutes” (pp. 172-173), please explain Singer’s concept of “equality of
consideration.” (p. 173)
When calculating the rightness of an action, one should both include all affected interests and weigh
those interests equally.
10.
What are the two reasons Singer offers, for why we should not discriminate based upon sex and
race? (pp. 173-174)
There are no differences between the races and sexes and a person's sex is no guide to his or her
abilities.
11.
One of the primary governing principles of the Utilitarianism theory is “each counts as one,” with
no distinction. Singer has addressed the topics of both racism and sexism.
What do he suggest
to be true, in his opinion, about the topic of “speciesism”? (p. 174, right-hand column)
Speciesism as discrimination on the basis of species membership is equivalent with sexism and racism.
12.
After reading the first two paragraphs (on p. 175), specifically including the indented paragraph,
what does Jeremy Bentham – father of the Utilitarian theory – tell us about the way the ultimate
question the French (even during the time of slavery) believed should be asked to determine
whether animals are worthy of moral consider; hence, having moral status?
The blackness of the skin is no reason why a human should be abandoned.
13.
What are the three (3) types of “speciesism” that Singer describes? What does he say about the
use of orphan babies, for experimentation? Do you agree, under the Utilitarian theory?
If not,
what is the difference between human babies and non-human animals, with regard to
“personhood”? Does your answer change for adult human being in an extended vegetative state,
such as the infamous Terry Schiavo case, in 2001? (pp. 175-176)
Biomedical speciesism: Experimenting on animals, eating animals flesh, and speciesism in contemporary
philosophy. According to Singer, if it were the only way to save many lives, experiment on an orphan
infant to avoid the complication of parental feelings. Under Utilitarian theory, it is justifiable if the
experiment on the orphan will save many lives.
14.
Please explain the concept of “intrinsic dignity” and “intrinsic worth. (pp. 177-178)
Intrinsic dignity and/or worth mean that value that people have because they are human, not by virtue
of any social standing, any particular set of talents, skills, or powers, or the ability to evoke admiration.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help