Announcements
- I need your field trip preferences
- No office hours today
- I randomly picked dates for pop quizzes. Beware!
- Next time: non-western views of animals.
_________________________
Peter Singer recap
Apply his view to the Icelanders
Singer's view of these practices
- Puffins are sentient (they have pain and pleasure)
- So they have interests
- Their interests should receive the same consideration as comparable interests of non-puffins (e.g. humans or other birds)
- We shouldn't dismiss their interests out of speciesism
But what is the bottom line? What should the Icelanders DO?
Peter Singer accepts
Utilitarianism -- we should maximize total happiness, taking into account all affected by our actions without regard for race, sex, species, etc.
- Do the Icelanders maximize total happiness by saving puffins? Yes, probably.
- Do the Icelanders maximize total happiness by killing and eating puffins? No, probably not.
What we should DO depends on the facts.
_________________________
- Note that some of the language and topics are a bit outdated.
Contrast with Singer
- Singer: we owe animals equal consideration -- if we give them that we might still use them in some ways in some circumstances
- Regan: We must recognize that animals have rights -- this will completely stop us from using them as resources
_________________________
I. Other views and why they're wrong
- Indirect duty views (pg. 2-3)
- Contractarianism (pg. 3-4)
- Cruelty-kindness view (pg. 5)
- Utilitarianism (pg. 5-7)
- The cup objection
- The Aunt Bea objection
_________________________
II. Argument for animal rights (pg. 7-10)
Premises, conclusion
P1 Humans have inherent value (pg. 7) -- value in themselves, and not just to others or based on what they "contain."
P2 All humans who have inherent value have it equally--regardless of "talents or skills, intelligence and wealth" (pg. 7), regardless of usefulness to others, etc.
P3 Humans have that inherent value because we are all not merely sentient, but "experiencing subjects of a life." (pg. 8)
P4 Based on the equal inherent value of all humans, all humans have an equal right to be treated with respect.
P5 But animals are experiencing subjects of a life too, which means they also have inherent value. (pg. 8)
P6 Animals don't have less inherent value because of their lower intelligence, considering that less intelligent humans don't have less inherent value. "All who have inherent value have it equally, whether they be human animals or not." (p. 9)
CONCLUSION Animals likewise have an equal right to be treated with respect.
_________________________
III. Implications
Right to be treated with respect --> right to life, right to liberty, right to not be treated as a resource
- Abolition of commercial agriculture
- Abolition of using animals in research--"Lab animals are not our tasters, we are not their kings." (pg. 10)
- End of hunting and trapping