| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "DRUIDISM ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION": |
|
|
|
Druidism and Animal Experimentation, 2004.
A discussion on Druidic attitudes towards animals and animal experimentation.
799 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, from a Druidic stand-point, animal experimentation and testing on animals would be deemed unethical, immoral, and against the beliefs and teachings of Druidism. It looks at how many modern Druids would probably reiterate that it is indeed against their beliefs, due to their strong ties to nature and the animal world. It discusses how, although some may argue that sacrifices played a role in Druidism, Druid rituals actually only required the use of animal bones or skins; animals were never used to experiment upon or abused for trophies. It also explores how Druids used animal remains and plants for medicinal reasons, as well as religious purposes.
From the Paper
"By all accounts, Druids lived close to nature, where Nature and animals played a key role in their beliefs. They did not believe in fighting or war, but more in education and the sciences of philosophy, astronomy and poetry. There was a strong bond between man and animal, with many of the deities in Druidism had physical similarities to animals. Elements of nature ?were inhabited by guardian spirits? (Pollack, pg226) and ?the importance of animals in the religious life can also be seen in the fact that of the eight Druid festivals of the year, four of them, known as the Fire Festivals, are particularly related to the pastoral life of animal rearing and agriculture? (Carr-Gomm, pg8)."
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 2005.
This paper argues in favor of the continuation of animal experimentation for medical purposes.
1,995 words (approx. 8.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that not testing on animals first would mean a marked increase in the loss of human life because new treatments would have to be tested on humans. The author points out that animal experimentation has been an integral part of many medical advancements throughout the modern age; utterly scrapping the process could only result in future problems for society. The paper stresses that acknowledging the moral position of animal experimentation does not free us from our obligations to minimize those animals' pain and suffering because humans possess some duties to nature that extends beyond our commitments to society.
From the Paper
"There have been numerous arguments made for and against experimentation on animals, and some are more compelling than others. Some people suggest that the practice is immoral because choosing to experiment upon animals is directly analogous to racial or sexual discrimination; or more closely related to discrimination on the basis of mental capacity. Others contend that it is wrong because, by their estimations, no clear advances in medical research have been made through animal experimentation, and alternative modes of research are emerging. Doubtlessly, animal experimentation is a delicate moral issue, but asserting that animals should enjoy the same rights as humans within a society is a weak claim. Arguments have been formed differentiating animals from humans depending upon both their moral status and biological status. Yet, the most obvious line of reasoning is associated with the fact that granting animals the same rights as humans within society leads to many logical contradictions."
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 2005.
A discussion of the alternatives to animal experimentation and why they should be considered.
1,124 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents the argument that alternative research methods exist and have been proven to be more accurate, less expensive and less time-consuming than cruel animal experimentation. It explains however, that those who benefit financially from experimenting on animals or supplying vivisectors with cages, restraining devices, food for caged animals and tiny guillotines to destroy animals insist that most medical advances has been made through the use of animal testing. It concludes that while most drugs and procedures must now be tested on animals before hitting the market, this does not mean that animal experiments are invaluable or irreplaceable. Alternative methods are a viable option.
From the Paper
"Vivisection, the practice of experimenting on animals, started as a result of religious prohibitions against the dissection of human corpses (WAVA, 2005). By the time these prohibitions were taken away, the practice of animal vivisection for medical, cosmetic and military purposes, had become common practice in various institutions around the world. Animals are subjected to tremendous suffering for the sake of science and technological advancement (WAVA, 2005). Estimates of animals tortured and killed in U.S. scientific laboratories range from 17 to 70 million per year."
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 2002.
This paper discusses the problems of cruelty to animals through animal experimentation.
515 words (approx. 2.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper states that about 20 million animals are cruelly killed per year for product testing. The author feels that alternative means of testing can be used.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Death and Injury Rate
Drug Testing
Horror in the Lab
Tests Performed
Alternatives
Conclusion
From the Paper
"It?s hard to imagine the cruelty some animals are subjected to during experimentation. Last year, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a researcher was videotaped ?using scissors to cut the heads off conscious, unanaesthetized animals before removing their brains (Heyde, 2002).? The researcher admitted doing it for convenience, though it violated university protocol."
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 1990.
This paper focuses on the issue of using animals in experimentation: Ethics, protests, benefitsand drawbacks, scientfic views, toxicity testing, quality control and laws.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 3 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Using animals for laboratory research is not new: European researchers first began large scale animal experimentation in the nineteenth century. Today, the use of animals in experiments is so widespread and so uncontrolled that no one is certain of the exact number of animals being used. Estimates range from between 30 million animals per year to 100 million. What is known for certain is that animals are suffering a great deal of pain and premature death during the experiments. Sometimes, the tests themselves are suspect, meaning that animals are being sacrificed for no apparent reason. Companies have arisen specifically for the purpose of providing animals for research purposes, bringing with them questionable business practices and leaving behind the welfare of the animals in question. This paper focuses on the issue of using animals in experimentation, ... "
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 1999.
Pros & cons, animal rights movement, medical benefits, religious and philosophical views, alternatives.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 18 sources, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research assesses within an ethical context the practice of animal experimentation conducted as a part of medical and other biological research. The positions of ethicists Daniel Callahan, Charles Curran, and William May, and others are conside
From the Paper
"This research assesses within an ethical context the practice of animal experimentation conducted as a part of medical and other biological research. The positions of ethicists Daniel Callahan, Charles Curran, and William May, and others are considered.
The Issue and Its Dimensions
The issue of the ethics surrounding the use of animals in medical and other biological experimentation for purposes of research is linked inextricably to the animal rights movement, which provides the strongest and most vocal opposition to the practice. As is true of so many social phenomena in the United States, the animal rights movement appeared to most Americans to develop..."
| |
|
Ethics & Animal Experimentation, 1996.
Moral & religious (Christian & Jewish) aspects of debate over use of animals in science & research into human disease.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 9 sources, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to explore the issues involved in animal experimentation from the perspectives of theology and ethics. Christian and other religious viewpoints are considered, along with the specific body of ethics that has built up around biomedical research. Some fundamental questions are raised. What is humankind's relationship with the rest of the animal world? Do humans have moral responsibilities and obligations toward animals and, indeed, toward the natural environment of which humans are all a part? Should animals be used at all in biomedicine? Are there alternatives? Do animals have rights? Do they deserve to be treated humanely? What limits should be set in animal experimentation? What ethics should guide the use of animals in ..."
| |
|
Animal Experimentation, 1995.
Argues against the use in scientific research on moral grounds and offers alternatives.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 8 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The use of animals in scientific research cannot be justified on moral grounds. Animals have rights; philosophers have debated the extent of these rights for centuries. Recently, the American public has made significant strides in re-examining the inhumane treatment given to nonhuman creatures in the name of scientific advancement.
The current debate about animal rights is based on precedent set by Cartesian and utilitarian philosophers. Rene Descartes, the French philosopher, likened animals to machines because nonhuman creatures lacked the ability to reason and think. Animals, who learned only by experience, were inferior to human beings, who possessed the ability to learn through a variety of means. To Descartes, the inferior status of animals justified their exploitation as experimental research subjects. Descartes' ..."
| |
|
Experimentation on Animals, 2002.
A paper arguing against the use of medical experiments on animals.
1,970 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows that despite the many tests being done on animals in the name of medicine, not many are applicable to human beings. The paper covers reasons why experiments should not be carried out on animals - mostly due to the cruelty and inhumanity of the issue. It offers alternative solutions to medical studies such as computer simulation instead of animal vivisection.
From the Paper
"There are various experiments that have indicated that animal testing and experimentation do not give the same results as those that may be seen on humans. As humans became more finely tuned and evolved, they lost their resistance and become more susceptible to impurities and infections than animals. To wit: in the1940s, human clinical investigation strongly indicated that asbestos caused cancer, animal studies repeatedly failed to demonstrate this; studies of human patients had already shown by 1963 a strong correlation between cigarette smoking and lung cancer, however almost all experimental efforts to produce lung cancer in animals had failed (Cohen, Kaufman, Ruttenberg, Fano, 1998). "
| |
|
Animal Rights/Animal Liberation, 1999.
Defends the ethical basis for the animal rights movement in their fight against the use of animals in research, based on ecocentric philosophy.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 16 sources, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Serious questions have been raised about the ethical justification of the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings. Moral condemnation for the use of animals to benefit humans, however, is not the principal point of such questions. The issue of the use of animals in research is an integral part of the framework of animal rights/animal liberation within the larger structure of environmental ethics. This research defends the ethical framework of animal rights/ animal liberation. The primary focus in this defense is on the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings
From the Paper
"ANIMAL RIGHTS/ANIMAL LIBERATION: AN ETHICAL DEFENSE
Introduction
Serious questions have been raised about the ethical justification of the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings. Moral condemnation for the use of animals to benefit humans, however, is not the principal point of such questions. The issue of the use of animals in research is an integral part of the framework of animal rights/animal liberation within the larger structure of environmental ethics. This research defends the ethical framework of animal rights/ animal liberation. The primary focus in this defense is on the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings.
The Ethical Basis of Animal Rights/Animal Liberation ..."
| |
|
Animal Rights, 2007.
This paper explores the subject of animal rights and looks at the debate over animal experimentation.
909 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer explains that the nature of animal rights necessarily converges upon the modern debate of animal experimentation. After all, the writer points out, if it is morally acceptable to experiment upon animals, then one has said something important about the extent to which non-humans can have rights within society. Additionally, the writer notes that one can make further claims as to the type of experiments that are morally justifiable and precisely which animals may be afforded any rights. Overall, the writer maintains that the case for animal rights must center upon what types of organisms can reasonably be protected under the law -- if they can voluntarily act under the confines of law.
From the Paper
"First, it must be established that human societies have been formed for the mutual advantages of those within them. Each person, as a member of society, is required to contribute something to its overall functioning, and in doing this, they are allowed to receive the contributions of others. So, the criterion for becoming a legal member of a society is that you are able to freely choose to make a contribution or not. So, despite the observation that animals may be able to contribute something to human life that is mutually beneficial--like a puppy providing us with happiness and us providing it with food--it is irrational to assert that animal species should be allowed to choose whether to enter into this bargain or not. Society is not designed, and cannot be designed, for animal benefit in general; only specific examples of mutual advantage can be found. Therefore, not all animals can have legal rights as citizens."
| |
|
Animal Research, 2003.
Discusses some of the pros and cons of animal experimentation.
2,667 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is an argumentative research paper that is clearly in favor of animal experimentation. The paper discusses the pros and cons of animal research as well as the ethics. It also discusses the activities of animal rights organizations, and the ways in which these organizations effect animal research.
From the Paper
"Animal research is a controversial topic that puts images of abuse and cruelty into many people?s minds; however, these images are results of misleading information that animal rights activists provide to the public, and in order to fully understand the importance of animal experimentation, you must realize that almost every medical advance owes its success in part to animal research. Many people do not consider the reasons animal research is absolutely essential to science and for the betterment of the human race."
| |
|
The Use of Animals in George Orwell's "Animal Farm", 2001.
This paper looks at George Orwell's novel, "Animal Farm."
1,105 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is an in-depth examination of George Orwell's use of animal characters in his novel, "Animal Farm." The use of animals as metaphor is also detailed. The author looks at the political environment at the time the book was written and at the message the author was trying to convey to his readers.
From the Paper
"Animals are not simply seen as innocent. Common stereotypes about animals tie into their roles in the story nicely. For example, in many countries pigs are often seen as lazy and greedy animals that like to hog resources. Fittingly, in the novel we are told that first the milk and apples, prized delicacies among the animals, were taken by the pigs, with the false explanation that ?milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig? (27). Later, the pigs award themselves the privilege of waking up an hour after all the other animals and sleeping in ?very comfortable beds?, and they again spread propaganda and create false reasons for their actions (50)."
| |
|
Science and Technology in Animal Rights Literature, 2005.
Examines representations of science, scientists and technology within the animal rights movement, analyzing animal rights literature.
8,000 words (approx. 32.0 pages), 45 sources, APA, $ 172.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the animal rights movement as presented in literature published by animal rights activists. It first presents the negative attitudes within the animal rights movement towards science and scientists. Next, it examines the animal rights movement's position in society in order to show how this movement is infiltrating the current paradigm of both scientific and lay society. The paper then examines each of the three areas of animal experimentation (biomedical research, product testing, and education). Surveying each of these three, the paper presents the argument posed by the animal rights activists against the use of animals and then presents examples of scientific and technological alternatives currently in use.
Paper Outline:
Introduction
Negative Attitudes Towards Science and Scientists
Animal Rights in Society
Biomedical Research
Product Testing
Education
Conclusion
Bibliography
From the Paper
"Pressures to accelerate legislation concerning the use of animals in scientific experimentation have resulted in legislative mandates under discussion in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Bills introduced in both 1988 and 1989 (known as the Consumer Products Safety Testing Act) would require Federal agencies to promulgate regulations specifying that non-animal tests be used whenever possible. When specific non-animal alternatives are found to be less valid, agencies would be required to publish explanations and justifications of continued animal use."
| |
|
Animal Testing: How Important Is It?, 2001.
An argument on whether animal testing is ethical or not.
1,275 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 6 sources, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the arguments raised both against and in support of animal testing. It is believed that animals are subjected to cruelty during researches but medical science feels it would absolutely unwise to ban animal testing altogether as it would hinder the progress being made in different branches. It is therefore important to study the subject of animal experimentation in order to find out which group has more valid arguments in support of their stance.
From the Paper
"Animal testing is the most commonly used method in not only medical research but also all other kind of scientific research, which has resulted in worldwide protests. It is believed that since many animals are subjected to cruelty during the research, it is an unethical practice, which must be banned. Even animal testing for cosmetic products has also been widely condemned. ?According to a 1994 study of the Tufts University Center for Animals and Public Policy, as many as 50 million or more animals were used each year in American medical research before 1970. Because of the growing influence of animal protection groups, this number had declined to an estimated 20 million animals in 1992.?" (http://www.tufts.edu/vet/cfa/index.html)
|
|
|
