Abstract This paper is about the ethics of animal rights and using animals for medical experiments and to test products (eye makeup etc.). The paper uses a case analysis approach involving "The Body Shop" cosmetics and personal care company.
From the Paper "This case analysis is concerned with a decision by a company operating in the cosmetics and personal care products industry to reject the use of research and testing involving non human animals in the development and manufacture of products sold by the company. The company at the focus of this case analysis is "The Body Shop". This case analysis assesses the issues surrounding this decision from a perspective of ethical systems and theory."
Abstract This paper examines how the People for the EthicalTreatment of Animals (PETA) is one of the most popular and largest animal liberation groups in the world and how PETA feels that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any way. It contends that while alternative methods have been developed, the testing of animals must still be embraced and the paper exposes the hypocrisy of the PETA organization by bringing to the table, the facts of animal rights and the pros of animal testing.
From the Paper "Total animal liberation means that all animals in captivity anywhere should be set free. If PETA were given the opportunity to rule the world, total animal liberation would outlaw fishing, circuses, dog shows, horseback riding, zoos, service animals for the disabled, and even taking medicine to kill the animals(bacteria) in your system. In my opinion, I feel that if animals were given total liberation many of them would end up in "animal prison" because all rights come with responsibilities. Most animals would assault and potentially kill each other as well as humans, all of them will not pay taxes, and they would be urinating and defecating all over the place."
Abstract The paper summarizes and critiques several different theories associated with the ethicaltreatment of animals. The paper focuses on the treatment of animals as it relates to hunting and trapping animals, eating animals, using animals for research, and the manner in which domestic and wild animals are treated. The paper summarizes and critiques several theories including anthropocentrism, animal liberation, strong animal rights theory, weak(er) animal rights theory, two-factor egalitarianism, biocentric egalitarianism and ecocentric views.
Outline:
Introduction
Anthropocentrism
Animal Liberation
Biocentric Egalitarianism
Weak Animal Rights Theory
Strong Animal Rights Theory
Two Factor Egalitarianism
Ecocentric Views
Opinion Concerning Ethical Issues and the best Theory to Address These Issues
Conclusion
From the Paper "Finally, as it relates to the manner in which domestic and wild animals are treated, there must be standards associated with their treatment. As it relates to domestic animals there are many laws that govern their treatment and the responsibilities that owners have for their pets. As it relates to wild animals there is a definite need to have animals at zoos for the purpose of educating people. If an animal is near extinction people might have more compassion and a greater understanding of the plight of the animal if they were educated about their existence and why it needs to be preserved. Educating people may also challenge them to do what they can to preserve a particular species. As with domestic animals there are rules a regulations that govern the treatment of animals at zoos and aquariums, these regulations should be adhered to and in some cases the laws. "
Abstract This paper describes the work and ideas of People for the EthicalTreatment of Animals (PETA) and gives an account of an exercise carried out to promote its cause and explain its positions.
Outline:
Introduction
Methodology
Language Analysis
From the Paper "The saying goes that actions speak louder than words, and for some groups attempting to persuade the public of the virtue of their point of view, this can be an unfortunate truth. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) offer a persuasive argument on their website and in various literature, but the virtues of their point of view are often lost on the public because of actions the group has taken that cause people to view them as a fringe group with extreme ideas. The ideas may not really be that extreme, but their actions sometimes are and so undercut the power of their speech. PETA is dedicated first to the same sorts of issues as the SPCA (or the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). The latter group seeks legislation to prevent cruelty to animals and promotes public awareness of cases of cruelty. The group also promotes caring for animals as a virtue to be pursued. PETA does much the same but also takes more extreme positions against those who in any way disagree with them or who may use animals in any way that causes the disapproval of the organization. This sometimes leads to extreme action, such as throwing blood on people wearing fur. Such actions have given the group a reputation that undercuts the persuasive power of their speech."
Abstract This paper describes the history, development, goals and policies of the PETA organization. The paper talks about its membership, its spokespersons, its investigative, political and legal activities, and its successes and failures in achieving its objectives. The paper also looks at the controversial aspect of the organization and what it could do to better meet its objectives in the fight for animal rights.
From the Paper "The organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA,), is an international nonprofit group dedicated to the defense and protection of all animals (PETA Media Center, "Fact Sheet"). Their work brings together members from all walks of life, including scientists, the judicial system, legislative communities, and ordinary citizens. Though their methods have been criticized in the past, their goals remain vital parts of our culture today."
Abstract The paper discusses Peter Singer's beliefs that while we may exploit animals for food or clothing, we need to be certain that we take the interests of the animals into consideration. The paper paints a picture of the often cruel treatment of animals by humans where there is no ethical consideration of the animal's interests whatsoever. The paper stresses that while the idea of producing mass quantities of low-cost food is not in itself evil, innocent animals deserve ethically defensible treatment.
From the Paper "Peter Singer is acknowledged as the father of the animal rights movement. His book Practical Ethics (1979) actually does not argue for animal rights, but rather for animal welfare. Singer's philosophy is utilitarian. His utilitarian approach is to judge right and wrong behavior on the basis of the behavior's consequences. The right act is the one that maximizes positive or beneficial consequences for all parties involved. The good or bad effects an action produces provide the basis for judgment of the action itself. The consequences of the individual specific act are what matter--and not what would happen if everybody acted the same way. This view is called act-utilitarianism."
Abstract The ethicaltreatment of animals in today's society has come to a crucial standoff between those who oppose any use of animals for testing along with the mistreatment of factory farm animals, and those who believe that the use of animals for such activities are important to protect and feed humans. The paper reflects where the line should be drawn - should animals have the same rights as humans, or are they of a lesser life-form and be used as a resource? This paper discusses the far extremes of this matter, being the absolute disregard for animals having any rights, versus the belief that animals are capable of feeling emotions and pain.
From the Paper "A small rat sits alone in a cage. On an hourly basis a chemical is pumped through the air supply. This is a project that will eventually kill the rat, but it might just save millions of humans. "Every day, consumers in more than 140 countries purchase P&G (Proctor & Gamble) products - from deodorants and shampoos to laundry detergents and household cleaners. They take for granted that these products will be safe when used as instructed. " Five chickens are crammed in a cage so tight they cannot turn around thus, their energy is stored in the body to create more flesh. Their beaks have been removed by heated blade so that they do not peck each other to death. Their feathers have been rubbed off and their skins chaffed. These chickens are deprived of light so that they will eat larger amounts of food. They will provide more poultry meat than any free range chickens. This isn't Old MacDonald's Farm."
Abstract While, today, we talk of acts being good or bad, often in reference to some ethical code or rule, if one were to read Plato or Aristotle, one would find them assessing acts on the basis of their promotion of the good in individuals. The ethical theory under which the ancient Greek philosophers operated is now termed "virtue ethics". In order to better understand this complex mode of ethical judgement, this essay will describe in detail what it entails. Then, in order to better appreciate its significance, it will be applied to the question of the ethicaltreatment of animals in the modern world. Finally, on the basis of the description and application, an evaluation will be made of its value as an ethical theory.
Abstract This paper studies the organizations, governmental agencies and courtrooms acting to protect animals from cruelty. The paper begins with a review of the laws against cruelty to animals. Next, the paper explores the mission and success of some of the most well-known non-profit organizations working to protect animals. Included are the Humane Society and American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, as well as People for the EthicalTreatment of Animals (PETA). The paper also briefly discusses smaller, grassroots organizations, like Animal Cruelty Actionline. The paper then turns to the laws against animal cruelty and their application in several rather disturbing courtroom cases.
From the Paper "There are currently hundreds of organizations around to prevent and stop cruelty to animals. The most widely recognized organizations are the American Humane Society and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The ASPCA since its inception has become a role model for other similar organizations to follow. The organization has a legislative action center in which volunteers are asked to write their legislatures in order to rally for stricter penalties against animal cruelty. Volunteers are kept abreast on current issues related to animal cruelty. The society also keeps a listing of animal humane law enforcement officials and animal control agencies throughout the United States."
Attempts to address the issue of animal rights by asking the question, from a humanistic perspective, "what potential exists for a healthy construct of the rights of animals?"
Abstract This paper briefly looks at the evolution of the Western world's views on the treatment of animals and how the lack of a agreement on what an animal precisely is causes difficulties in addressing the issue of animal rights. It goes on to present a debate on the issue of animal rights through three different perspectives: ethical relativism, utilitarianism, and ethical egoism.
Sentient Rights in a Solitary World
The Essential Problem of the Definitions
Framework of the Debate within this Context
Taking A Position -- Modified Personal Responsibility
Ethical Traditions Within The Framework
Summary
From the Paper "In recent years, the ethical issue of animal rights has seriously entered into the realm of philosophical debate. This in itself shows a change in perspective, for until relatively recently the issue was not even seriously broached by philosophers, save maybe in sport or to highlight the absurdity of a line of reasoning. However, increasingly within modern philosophy, the issue may be broached. While one would think that the demands of such philosophies as egoism and utilitarianism would subjugate the position of animals, it seems historically that the reverse has somewhat been true. The question then becomes, within a humanistic mind-set, what potential exists for a healthy construct of the rights of animals? The answer lies in comprehending the individual focus of these philosophies, and treating this issue not as one of social or legal mandate, but as one of personal cognizance."
Abstract Since the 1970s, the feminist movement has expanded in many directions. There are feminists solely concerned with equal rights for women who are part of the liberal wing of feminism. There are the romantic feminists who contend that women and men really are different, but that the superiority is on the side of women's socialization. The paper shows that there are also feminists who have connected more with international movements for social justice, sustainability and ecological rights. This paper conducts an interview with a feminist involved with the animals rights movement. It then briefly explores the connection between feminism and animal rights by analyzing available literature on the subject.
From the Paper "Vandana Shiva (1989) provided many concrete examples of the connection between women's oppression, and suffering, and the degradation of the natural world. She also talked about the way that ordinary women themselves have begun to make that connection and start to fight back to preserve the parts of their world that allow them to survive. For example, the Chipko movement in India was begun by women who sought to stop deforestation by literally hugging trees, trying to keep the trees from being removed. For them, the trees, and a sustainable forest ecology, meant the ability to provide heat, energy, cooking fuel, and other necessities for their families. They realized that with deforestation and development came poverty. Development, in the Western style, was not desirable to many of them."
Abstract In this article, the writer notes that prior to the scientific understanding of the physiological basis of pain reception in vertebrate animal species, it may have been understandable that humans disregarded the unnecessary pain that they imposed on animals. However, the writer maintains that today one understands completely that even the animals we raise for slaughter deserve to have any pain, trauma, and discomfort associated with our use of them minimized or eliminated, rather than utterly disregarded. The writer discusses the suffering caused to sharks by humans from an ethics point of view. The writer concludes that the vast majority of shark attacks on human are attributable to the ridiculous practice of feeding sharks in the open ocean, such as in conjunction with tourist cruises and diving expeditions. The writer argues that even were it true that sharks actively hunted humans to the extent that it required culling their numbers, that issue remains completely distinguishable from the obligation to do so less cruelly rather than more cruelly, without regard for their suffering.
From the Paper "The concept of human sensitivity toward non-human animals has taken a long time to develop and in many respects, still lags far behind other moral concerns. In much of modern Western society, dogs and cats are kept as pets, along with various other species of animals, in conjunction with which Americans provide them with veterinary care and other benefits of love and protection from harm. At the same time, we exhibit comparatively little moral concern at all for many of the animal species we raise for consumption.
"In other parts of the world, animals are often afforded substantially less consideration and absolutely no thought at all to the excruciating pain and other unnecessary suffering that our treatment of them causes, despite the fact that reducing or eliminating it would take very little effort at all."
Abstract The paper argues that animal testing cannot provide firm evidence that a new product is safe because of the differences between humans' and animals' body structures. The paper reveals that products which do not produce any problem in animals can cause side effects in humans. The paper contends that the testing methods used are immoral and violate an animal's rights and asserts that only alternative testing methods should be used.
From the Paper "Most animals living with their owners will be able to spend their lives happily because they will always get love from their owners. Meanwhile, there are many other animals living in terrifying circumstances inside a laboratory. They are living in a small cage and they can only expect to be used as a test subject for new substances in the future. Experimentation on live animals began as early as the 17th century and the practice of testing cosmetics on animals began in 1933 ("History of Animal Testing"). Today, there are many varieties of animals used for experiments, and the number is enormous."
Abstract This paper considers the controversial subject of animal rights and looks at why it is important to treat animals more humanely, even if they are not and cannot be granted the same rights as human beings. The paper explains that, while animals are not on the same evolutionary ladder as the human species, they are still subject to the same type of physiological pain that humans suffer and, therefore, deserve our mercy, kindness, and humane treatment.
From the Paper "Animal rights or animal-human relationship is as controversial a subject as abortion and genetic research. This is because despite endless debates, several philosophical theories, numerous viewpoints and research findings, there appears to be no end in sight for this issue. How should we treat animals? Do they deserve our love and mercy? Can they be used for human consumption and benefit? How legal or morally justified is the use of animals in medical and cosmetic research? These are just some of the questions that arise when we discuss the ever-controversial subject of animal rights. The emergence of animal rights movement in late twentieth century sparked a huge controversy about treatment of animals and whether or not they deserved to be treated with the same respect we assign a human being."
Abstract This paper examines how strong arguments can be made for and against animal testing and how both sides are quite persuasive on a number of points. Through a literature review, it looks at how those against animal research make strong points about the excessive, pointlessly inhumane, and sometimes unnecessary use of animals, their terrible suffering and the need to look for alternative methods. It examines how they are less convincing in their claim that animals do not serve as adequate vehicles for useful testing or that the past record of achievements employing animal testing is unimpressive. It shows how those who favor the use of animals in research point to a record of achievement that has benefited humanity and are convincing in arguing that animals continue to be useful. But they cannot successfully defend the treatment of animals in terms of quality of life or the infliction of sometimes unnecessary suffering. It evaluates how the best solution is to develop guidelines that do not forbid the use of animals but insist on humane treatment, curtailing waste, sound justifications, eliminating unnecessary suffering, and commitment to developing alternatives to animal research.
From the Paper "The principal argument of the animal testing advocates is, therefore, that the use of animals in experiments has and does produce strong results that save hundreds of thousands of human lives. But the principal argument of the opposing side cannot be the one put forward by Barnard and Kaufman for, as the other writers show, there is a clear record of accomplishment and the attempt to mount a scientific argument, without "broach[ing] the ethical objections," is easily refuted (Barnard & Kaufman 82)."
