Do animals have moral standing?

1. 
   

Peter Carruthers, "Against the Moral Standing of Animals" (2011)

1. Part 1 (sec 1-3):  contractualist argument ... animals have no moral standing
2. Part 2 (sec 4-5): why is animal cruelty still wrong?

Thought experiments

1. Kids set a cat on fire for fun in a public place (p. 11)
2. Astrid the Astronaut and her pet cat (p. 12)
3. Astrid the Astronaut and her dead servant (p. 13)
4. Lazy Jane the doctor 

Why is cruelty and indifference wrong?

1. Because of what is shows about you and your character (compare Indian animal ethics)
2. Your cruelty will lead you to harm humans (compare Kant)
3. Contractors would agree that cruelty is wrong

_________________________

Preview of Monday's reading -- to make more time for field trips 

Sue Donaldson & Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights 

• they are Canadian
• they wrote this book in 2011
• we're reading their precis of the book -- a short summary
• "zoopolis" means (literally) animal city
• animalism, but a different kind of animalism than we've seen before

Individualistic animalism--our obligations to animals depend on each individual animal's "intrinsic moral standing" (D&K p. 1).

1. Peter Singer--sentience, interests
2. Tom Regan--being a subject of a life, rights

Political animalilsm

1. Intrinsic moral standing does matter
2. but so does "political status" 
3. both matter for both humans and animals

---

What do they mean by political status?

Passport control at DFW international terminal

Picture people who get off a plane

They all have  the same basic rights based on "intrinsic moral standing" (p. 1) – enshrined in Universal Declaration of Human Rights 

1. right to life
2. right to liberty
3. we can't torture or enslave any of them

But they have different rights based on "relationship to a particular political community" (p. 2)

1. Citizens of the US
• right to enter the US
• right to work here
• right to have their interests represented by government
• right to vote
• right to have access to public spaces (can go there, signs are in your language)
• right to emergency health care
• 
  
2. In-betweens/Denizens: "tourists, foreign students, refugee claimants, business visitors or temporary workers" (p. 2). 
• have all the basic rights based on "intrinsic moral standing" 
• don't have all of the rights of citizens, but do have some
• 
  
3. Foreign Nationals--citizens of other countries, back in home country
• have set of rights established in other nation

_________________________

D&K say animals are in parallel political categories 

1. Animal Citizens -- domesticated animals living with us-- for example pets
2. Animal Denizens  -- animals drawn to us but not living with us--squirrels, rats, mice, raccoons, ducks, geese, chimney swifts, swallows
3. Animal wild sovereigns --  live independently in wilderness (inside our borders or outside)

_________________________

Next time: arguments, details, what it means to be an animal citizen

Do animals have moral standing?

Look ahead

1. There have been no quizzes for a while...they are randomly scheduled!
2. Next time: more Carruthers, but I will also give you a preview of the next reading
3. Monday: 3 field trips

_________________________

_________________________

Module 3 -- Animals and humans: the contemporary debate

What is the moral status/moral standing of animals?

•  the extent to which moral agents (like us) have obligations to Xs

Views on animal moral standing

1. NO MORAL STANDING FOR ANIMALS
2. EQUAL MORAL STANDING FOR ANIMALS
3. SOME MORAL STANDING FOR ANIMALS

Today: Peter Carruthers, "Against the Moral Standing of Animals" (2011)

Next: type 3 views

_________________________

Recap

Singer and Regan: argument from marginal cases

Marginal cases: humans at the low end of the ability spectrum.  

Babies, cognitively impaired people, adults with advanced dementia, etc.

1. Some animals and some marginal cases have roughly the same abilities
2. So what you say about the moral standing of one you must say about the moral standing of the other. 
3. Since marginal cases have equal moral standing, so do animals.

One goal of Carruthers' article is to counter this argument

_________________________

Peter Carruthers,  "Against the Moral Standing of Animals" (2011)

SECTION 1, Assumptions

About animal minds

1. Animals are sentient
2. They aren't rational, don't weigh costs and benefits, can't abide by rules, etc.

_________________________

Why are there any moral truths? Why does anyone have moral standing? 

Ideas we have already encountered:

Religious answers: God gave humans special standing, prohibited murder, permitted eating animals
Aristotle: ruler-ruled is built into the constitution of the universe 
Regan: being a subject-of-life has inherent value
Singer: sentience is sentience 

Carruthers proposes a different answer: contractualism 

"All contractualists agree that moral truths are, in a certain sense, human constructions, emerging out of some or other variety of hypothetical rational agreement concerning the basic rules to govern our behavior." (Carruthers, pg. 2)

 

A few clarifications

1. The social contract is hypothetical, not real
2. The contractors are rational people, because only rational people can agree to a contract 
3. The contract situation is idealized -- people don't know what would be in their personal best interests -- they decide behind a "veil of ignorance" (Rawls)
4. The contractors have no moral beliefs ... for example, they don't go into it already believing "murder is wrong" ... morality is the "output" of their agreement (pg. 3 & 8) 
5. Contractualists think people everywhere would agree to the same things  

 _________________________

Carruthers, SECTION 2-- what would rational human contractors decide about humans?

All rational agents have equal moral standing

• they wouldn't agree to the contract otherwise         

Non-rational human agents (marginal cases) have equal standing

• The social stability argument -- pg. 5
  
• Regan's objection to contractualism: this is second class standing because they are not contractors; Carruthers says: no, its first class moral standing

_________________________

Carruthers, SECTION 3 -- animals

          Animals have no moral standing 

1. there's no social stability argument for giving them moral standing -- pg. 8
2. so they don't have it 
3. the fact that some animals have the same abilities as some marginal cases is irrelevant

_________________________

Rest of the article: can we really torture animals for fun?

 

Animal morality

Let's do some reviewing first...use the Exam 1 tab above

_________________________

Do animals have anything like morality?

        Does it matter, as far as their fundamental moral status is concerned?

1. Kant -- in some places, says YES
2. Singer, Regan -- NO

Two theories

1. Morality is something entirely new in humans, there's nothing like it in animals
2. There are rudiments/precursors of morality in animals; human morality evolved from these precursors (this is Frans DeWaal's view)

Who is Frans DeWaal?

• was a primatologist at Emory University

What are thes rudiments/precursors of morality in animals?

1. Perspective taking 
2. Targeted helping
• chimps will try to get humans to give them a banana outside their enclosure--will point if humans can see them--will make noise if humans can't see them
3. Cooperation 
•  the cooperative pulling paradigm
• teamwork in other animals--whales, orcas, lions, wolves, wild dogs, Harris's hawks, capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees
4. Empathy
5. Reciprocity & Fairness

Self-awareness

Today we're discussing...

• self-awareness
• awareness of oneself in past and future

Human self-awareness

• awareness of one's body
• introspection

Human awareness of self in past and future

_________________________

Does self-awareness (or self-consciousness) matter for moral status? 

YES (Kant)

"But so far as animals are concerned, we have no direct duties. Animals are not self-conscious and are there merely as a means to an end. That end is man." (Immanuel Kant, Lectures on Ethics AWT p. 6)

"The fact that man can have the idea 'I' raises him infinitely above all the other beings living on earth. By this he is a person; and by virtue of the unity of his consciousness, through all the changes he may undergo, he is one and the same person--that is, a being altogether different in rank and dignity from things, such as irrational animals, which we can dispose of as we please." (Kant, quoted in Fellow Creatures, by Christine Korsgaard, pg. 30) 

NO (Singer) 

 "If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration.No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering-insofar as rough comparisons can be made—of any other being. If a being is not capable of suffering, or of experiencing pleasure or happiness, there is nothing to be counted." Peter Singer, Animal Liberation Now, pg. 8 of our pdf

A non-self-aware sentient being still has interests and is entitled to equal consideration.  Then again, the non-self-aware may have somewhat difference interests. 

_________________________

Do any animals have self-awareness?

1. NO animals have any self-awareness (Kant's view)
2. SOME have it, some lack it (Gordon Gallup's view -- inventor of the mirror test)
3. ALL sentient animals have self-awareness to some degree

• feeling pain and pleasure creates awareness of ME
• bat is aware of certain echoes as MINE
• lion locates zebra relative to ME

_________________________

Some have, some lack....using the mirror recognition test to decide

• what is the "visual mark test"?

Frans DeWaal (Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are?)

• The mirror test can be passed to different degrees
• complete pass
• elephants
• What would Kant say?  Are elephants persons? Do they have full moral status?
• Also: Inside the animal mind episode 3, 32:44-36:40)

• intermediate--
• some animals fail the mark test but can use mirrors as a tool 

Using mirror as a tool

• intermediate--dogs and cats who don't react much to image instead of fighting with it

• complete fail--small songbirds and fighting fish--treat the image like it's someone else

_________________________

Mirror test videos

Problems with the mirror test

• too visual
• dogs are smell oriented -- recognize own urine
  

• bats and dolphins are sound oriented -- recognize own echoes

_________________________

Awareness of past self and future self

1. Recalling your past activities (episodic memory, autobiographical memory)
2. anticipating your future activities

Another term for both

• time travel

Animals: are they "stuck in the present" and therefore less self-aware?

_________________________

Episodic memory

1. recalling yourself at your high school graduation
2. using episodic memory strategically
• looking for my car in Airline garage -- visualize when I drove into it
• answering an exam question -- visualize when we were discussing it
• deciding whether to eat leftovers in your fridge--when did you put them there?

Contrast with other kinds of memory (that animals obviously have)

1. Knowing where your car is ....you just know
• Clark's nutcracker knows where the seeds are--Inside the Animal Mind I, 15:11-17:48- 
2. I can ride a bike ... dog heels

Is there evidence of episodic memory in animals?

• Chimps

DeWaal 

• when chimps are going to a fig tree they've visited before they get up early, walk in the dark(which they avoid), 

• Most plausible explanation: they recall past visits to the fig tree.

• Western scrub jays

Nicky Clayton's research
they dig up cached food

1. which food they dig up depends partly on "freshness"
2. so apparently they remember the act of caching
3. recently cached perishable foods are preferred

_________________________

Anticipating the future

Examples

• grabbing an umbrella because you think it will rain
• includes forethought, planning, anticipation

        Contrast with other types of future orientation

• Squirrels hoarding nuts for the winter
• They're doing it "for the winter" (future) but are they thinking about the future?
• Behavior could be just triggered by nuts + shortening of the day

        How to prove that animal is thinking about future?

• Chimps: Storing a tool today for use tomorrow 
• Crows

_________________________

Does it matter?

1. Why does self-awareness seem SO important to Kant?
2. is it really a determiner of fundamental moral status?

Animal sentience

Electronics policy reminder

• No phones, no laptops...no electronics period
• If you didn't ask me to be an exception to the policy, then you're not an exception
• Violating policy will result in penalties deducted from citizenship grade

_________________________

Exam 1 next Monday

1. see tab above
2. will review a bit Wed and Friday

_________________________

Sentience

• Negative sentience: pain, fear, anxiety, feeling too hot or cold, etc.
• Positive sentience: pleasure, enjoyment, exhilaration, love, optimism etc.

What kinds of positive sentience do animals have...especially animals at the "edge of sentience"?

What kinds of positive sentience do animals have...especially animals at the "edge of sentience"?

But first:  Ethically, why does it matter?

• Utilitarianism is one theory that says negative and positive sentience do matter

_________________________

Positive sentience in animals

• Inside the Animal Mind, part 2, 12-18 (see tab)
• pleasure in fish (NPR)
• article

_________________________

What do animals sense?  We'll watch this and then discuss.

Ed Yong

We will watch first 12 minutes

 

_________________________

Sensing = detecting -- the Waymo detects students in the crosswalk

Sensing = experiencing - feeling  -- the Waymo probably doesn't experience the students

Sensing  positively, sensing negatively -- the Waymo doesn't feel frustrated!

Ed Yong attributes not just detection to animals, but experiencing/feeling. 

To what extent is experience/feeling ethically important, if it's not positive sentience or negative sentience?

Animal sentience

 

_________________________

Sentience vs. Sapience

Sentience -- root word means "feeling"

1. Having experiences of any sort, being conscious
2. Having valenced (good vs. bad) experience 
• pain (bad), pleasure (good) 
• positive emotions: fun, love, excitement
• negative emotions: fear, anxiety
3. Living in a particular "sensory bubble" 
• seeing, smelling, hearing, etc.
• other senses in other animals

Sapience -- thinking of various kinds  (could be unconscious)

1. self-awareness
2. awareness of past and future
3. reason, rationality, intelligence
4. morality
5. communication, language

Today and Monday: sentience

Wed and Fri: sapience

_________________________

Today's reading -- "Animal Sentience," Heather Browning and Jonathan Birch

Background

• There is already some animal welfare legislation protecting some species
• Question: should more species be protected?
• Is there sentience in fish, octopuses, lobsters, insects, etc?
• They focus on pain mostly
• But we will be interested in all sorts of sentience

_________________________

Butterfly field trip

_________________________

Sentience in fish 

• what is it like to be a salmon swimming upstream to spawn? Is it exhilarating? Exciting? Do they feel tired? -- VIDEO
• what is it like to be farmed salmon? Do they feel crowded? Frustrated? (zugunruhe in birds)

• to think of fish as a "subject of a life" (Regan's term) it would be helpful to understand all their feelings
• but the study of sentience tends to focus on one feeling: pain

_________________________

What is pain?

1. starts with nociceptors--peripheral neurons that respond to damage; in skin, many areas of body -- thermal, mechanical, chemical, polymodal (wikipedia)
2. nociceptors lead to brain, where pain is felt

Nociception without a feeling of pain

• body damaged while you're focused on playing a sport

Price DD. Psychological and neural mechanisms
of the affective dimension of pain. Science. 2000

Do animals have nociceptors? 

Do they have pain experience?

_________________________

Lynne Sneddon articles; Victoria Braithwaite, Can Fish Feel Pain?

1. nociceptors (22 in face alone) -- trout dissected
2. pathways to brain -- dissection, study under microscope, electrical stimulation
3. after vinegar/bee venom injection (nociception) do they FEEL pain? 
• they rub snout on gravel on sides of tank
• elevated heart rate and respiration and reduced hunger 
• altered behaviors -- less avoidant of novelty
• they seek painkillers
• morphine changes these behaviors

Area of uncertainty

1. But a very different brain--does that matter? 
2. Just a few species studied

_________________________

Invertebrates--a totally different kind of nervous system

• Cephalopod molluscs--octopuses, squid
• Evidence of pain similar to fish
• but does the pain signal go to the animal's central brain or just to local brain in one arm?

• Decapod crustaceans--lobsters, crabs

• "The presence of nociceptors has not yet been conclusively established, though there is evidence of the detection of extreme heat" (Browning and Birch pg. 3)

• Insects

• "Insects will continue normal feeding and mating behaviours even when severely injured" (Browning and Birch p. 4)

• "We should be open to the possibility that the traditional focus on pain in this literature

  does not serve insects well. There are, of course, affects other than pain. For example, bees will show a ‘pessimistic’ judgement bias after being shaken" (Browning and Birch p. 4)

_________________________

Ethics when there's room for doubt

• "precautionary reasoning about sentience" (Browning and Birch pg. 5)
• if the lobster might  feel pain, don't throw them in boiling water
• Boiling lobsters alive to be banned in UK, already banned in some countries
• "might" is enough to justify laws protecting animals at "the edge of sentience"

_________________________

Next time: sentience beyond pain ... what are animals sensing and feeling? 

Beyond the west

 Animal Ethics camps

_________________________

Beyond the west: animal ethics in Ancient India

• Ancient Indian ethics associated with 3 religions: Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism
  
  
  
• Who is the author, Peter Adamson?
• Another article on animal ethics in Ancient India
• A podcast on animal ethics in Ancient India

Adamson's opening issue 

• cultural relativism: whatever another culture sees as right really is right, but just for them
• often countered by citing some moral abomination in another culture -- "The Aztecs sacrificed human children!!!!"
• implication: out standards are right
• better option: "point to moral beliefs of other cultures that are better" (p. 49)

Indian animal ethics

• better because more concern for animals
• better because more vegetarians in India
• better because a better basis for vegetarianism

Singer & Regan's basis for vegetarianism

• Singer: animals have interests, which we have to take into consideration
• Regan: animals have rights, which we have to respect
• Both: animal-centered ethics

Indian animal ethics

• ethic of ahimsa (non-violence)
• it's better for me to be non-violent -- through non-violence I flourish, make spiritual progress, become a better person
• note: violence towards animals is considered violence, so in that sense animals are elevated

Connection to eudaimonistic ethics (Aristotle)

• eudaimonia--flourishing, happiness in an elevated sense
• the ethical person has eudaimonia because they have a set of virtues

"Within this eudaimonist framework, what is wrong about harming animals is not that one infringes the animals' rights or interests. Rather it is that the harmful action would be an expression of a disruptive, violent mindset, one bent upon destruction rather than harmony with the world.  Vegetarianism, and more generally non-violent action, was really just a by-product of a peaceful, contented effortlessly controlled inner state, one that required years of practice to attain." (p. 51)

• note: Aristotle does NOT think of non-violence as a virtue!

_________________________

What exactly does non-violence involve? When am I being violent toward animals?

• monks vs. laypersons
• Buddhists vs. Jains vs. Hindus
• Different sects within each religion

Which practices are prohibited under an ethic of ahimsa?

1. Personally killing an animal for food 
2. Having an animal killed for food -- the animal is killed for you
3. Accidentally killing an animal 
• Jain monks: will avoid killing insects by sweeping ground, avoiding fire, wearing face masks
• Us: drive carefully on a road where there are deer or squirrels
4. Eating meat that wasn't killed by you or for you (more debateable)
• mendicant monks eating donated meat 
• eating meat on an airplane -- you ordered the vegetarian meal
• eating roadkill

Does ahimsa always rule out participating in killing?

1. Adamson discusses examples from the Bhagavad Gita
• participating in a just war 
• performing a ritual animal sacrifice
2. Can these things be done with a "non-violent state of mind"?

_________________________

Is it really better to take a human-centered approach to animal ethics?

One advantage of ahimsa approach

• animal-centered approach: must worried about whether giving up meat actually saves animals
• human-centered approach: ahimsa makes you better off, regardless of the impact on animals

The rights approach

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

1. Puffins are sentient (they have pain and pleasure)
2. So they have interests
3. Their interests should receive the same consideration as comparable interests of non-puffins (e.g. humans or other birds)
4. 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.

1. Do the Icelanders maximize total happiness by saving puffins? Yes, probably.
2. Do the Icelanders maximize total happiness by killing and eating puffins? No, probably not.

What we should DO depends on the facts.

Another application of Utilitarianism is here.

_________________________

Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (1980) Article is a precis of the book (1985) Article, annotated

• Note that some of the language and topics are a bit outdated.

Contrast with Singer

1. Singer: we owe animals equal consideration -- if we give them that we might still use them in some ways in some circumstances
2. 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

1. Indirect duty views (pg. 2-3)
2. Contractarianism (pg. 3-4)
3. Cruelty-kindness view (pg. 5)
4. 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

1. Abolition of commercial agriculture
2. Abolition of using animals in research--"Lab animals are not our tasters, we are not their kings." (pg. 10)
3. End of hunting and trapping

Animal liberation

FIELD TRIP SIGN-UP

_________________________

PRACTICE QUIZ

1. We will have 7-8 pop quizzes over the course of the semester.
2. They will be randomly scheduled 
3. The quizzes should be very easy if you have done the reading!
4. They will take various forms.
5. Your lowest quiz score will be dropped.
6. You can also drop one score based on missing class with an acceptable excuse.

_________________________

1970s -- surge of interest in treatment of animals.  During the same period...

1. The women's liberation movement
2. The civil rights movement
3. Children's liberation, The "Grey Panthers"
4. Peter Singer -- Animal Liberation
   

_________________________

Main ideas

Chapter 1 -- "All Animals Are Equal" (reading, annotated)

That's exactly what he's arguing--humans, dogs, cats, lions, puffins, rats .... all equal

(1)  What "equality" does not mean

"Equality for children" -- doesn't mean children get to vote or will be drafted during time of war

1. "equal" doesn't mean "factually just alike"
2. "equal" doesn't mean "must always be treated exactly the same"
3. "equal" doesn't mean "all rights exactly the same"

(2) What "equal" does mean

• READ passages A, B, C

The principle of equality: when A and B have the same interests, their interests should receive the same consideration, regardless of their race, sex, species, etc.

(3) When do individuals or groups come under the "principle of equality"?

• When they have interests
• And all it takes to have interests is the ability to suffer 
• Bentham understood this -- READ E, F, G

Clarification: suffering is a prerequisite for having any interests at all, but there are other interests besides avoiding suffering

(4) How (more precisely) to apply the principle of equality

• After a natural disaster people and animals "come under" the principle of equality but they may not always have exactly the same interests
• clean water 
• transport in lifeboats 
• medical attention for same injury
• evacuation with family 

Where humans are give such-and-such consideration based on their interests, and animals have the very same interest, animals should be given the same consideration.  We apportion consideration based on interests, not based on who has the interest.

(5) We are resistant to equality because of biases

1. racism
2. sexism
3. ageism
4. specieism READ D

(6)  But can animals actually suffer? (If not they don't have interests.)

• there is abundant scientific evidence that they can suffer
• absence of language is beside the point
• where to draw the line? We will discuss next week.

(7) What does "consideration" mean?

• Utilitarian approach--we should maximize total happiness, with each affected individual taken into account
• no discounting based on race, sex, species; no inflating anyone's importance based on race, sex, species
• next time: another view on what consideration means

DISCUSSION (WORKBOOK)

Duties to animals?

 Field trips

1. instructions
2. field trip brainstorming

_________________________

Humans and animals: classics

1. Bible
2. Aristotle (4th century BC)
3. Rene Descartes (1596-1650) [day-CART]
4. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) [rhymes with "font"]
5. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
6. Peter Singer (wrote 1970s onward)
7. Tom Regan (wrote 1970s onward)

_________________________

Another word about Descartes

1. Does Descartes think animals have ... reason, emotion, sensation?
2. Are they any modern Cartesians or is this an outmoded view of animals?

_________________________

Kant's Ethics

The Categorical Imperative (the one moral principle we must abide by)

I. Never treat persons as a means only, but always also as ends in themselves.

II. Act only on a policy that you could and would want all other persons to follow.

Why must we treat persons this way? they have a special dignity because of their 

• self-awareness
• rationality
• capacity for morality

Thus, persons are owed respect. This is the basis for all our specific duties.

_________________________

Do we have any duties to animals?

• No, they don't have these features, don't have dignity, aren't owed respect.

"Baumgarten speaks of duties towards beings

which are beneath us and beings which are

above us. But so far as animals are concerned,

we have no direct duties. Animals are not self-

conscious and are there merely as a means to an

end. That end is man."  (para 24)

"Our duties toward animals are merely indirect duties

toward humanity. Animal nature has analogies

to human nature, and by doing our duties to

animals in respect of manifestations of human

nature, we indirectly do our duty towards

humanity."  (para 24)

• Our apparent duties to animals are actually duties to humans.
• They're indirect duties to humans because the action involves an animal

This woman has no duty at all TO THE CAT
She has a duty TO HUMANITY that involves the cat.

_________________________

Why do we have a duty TO HUMANITY to be kind to animals? 

"Thus, if a dog has served his master

long and faithfully, his service, on the analogy

of human service, deserves reward, and when

the dog has grown too old to serve, his master

ought to keep him until he dies. Such action

helps to support us in our duties towards human

beings, where they are bounden duties." (para 24)

"If a man shoots his dog because

the animal is no longer capable of service, he

does not fail in his duty to the dog, for the dog

cannot judge, but his act is inhuman and

damages in himself that humanity which it is

his duty to show towards mankind." (para 24)

"If he is not to stifle his human feelings, he must practice

kindness toward animals, for he who is cruel to

animals becomes hard also n his dealing with

men. We can judge the heart of a man by his

treatment of animals. Hogarth depicts this in

his engravings. He shows how cruelty grows

and develops. He shows the child’s cruelty to

animals, pinch the tail of a dog or a cat; the

then depicts the crown man in his cart running

over a child; and lastly, the culmination of

cruelty in murder. He thus brings home to us in

a terrible fashion the rewards of cruelty, and

this should be an impressive lesson to children." (para 24)

Hogarth's prints 

_________________________

 Did Kant care about ANIMALS at all?

"The more we come in contact with animals and

observe their behavior, the more we love them,

for we see how great is their care for their

young. It is then difficult for us to be cruel in

thought even to a wolf. Leibnitz used a tiny

worm for purposes of observation and then

carefully replaced it with its leaf on the tree so

that it should not come to harm through any act

of his. He would have been sorry—a natural

feeling for a humane man—to destroy such a

creature for no reason." (para 24)

Bottom line (end of para 24)

1. Should care for your dog, even in old age
2. Vivisection can be justified
3. "cruelty for support" cannot be justified

But all duties toward animals are actually (indirect) duties toward humans.

_________________________

We'll talk about Bentham next time, since Peter Singer quotes him.

_________________________

Animal Ethics Camps

• Demoters -- give animals very low status
• Humane traditionalists -- we have limited duties to animals but do owe them some consideration
• Animalists -- raise the status of animals, possibly to human-animal equality

White board