Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Arguments For Animal Rights

    Uploaded by

    rachelmlea
    6 views3 pages
    The document discusses four topics related to the moral treatment of animals: hunting, zoos, animal experimentation, and eating meat. For hunting, it argues that killing animals for sustenance can be morally acceptable in some cases where hunting provides sustenance. For zoos, it claims that keeping animals in captivity is morally acceptable if it saves species from extinction. Regarding experimentation, it states some cases are morally permissible if they generate knowledge to benefit other living beings. Finally, it suggests people may be morally obligated to refrain from eating meat since its production often causes more harm than good.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Arguments for Animal rights

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses four topics related to the moral treatment of animals: hunting, zoos, animal experimentation, and eating meat. For hunting, it argues that killing animals for sustenance can be morally acceptable in some cases where hunting provides sustenance. For zoos, it claims that keeping animals in captivity is morally acceptable if it saves species from extinction. Regarding experimentation, it states some cases are morally permissible if they generate knowledge to benefit other living beings. Finally, it suggests people may be morally obligated to refrain from eating meat since its production often causes more harm than good.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    6 views3 pages

    Arguments For Animal Rights

    Uploaded by

    rachelmlea
    The document discusses four topics related to the moral treatment of animals: hunting, zoos, animal experimentation, and eating meat. For hunting, it argues that killing animals for sustenance can be morally acceptable in some cases where hunting provides sustenance. For zoos, it claims that keeping animals in captivity is morally acceptable if it saves species from extinction. Regarding experimentation, it states some cases are morally permissible if they generate knowledge to benefit other living beings. Finally, it suggests people may be morally obligated to refrain from eating meat since its production often causes more harm than good.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Hunting Argument

    1) If a person is in a situation in which they can kill a non


    human animal for sustenance, then it is morally acceptable for
    them to do so.

    2) In some cases of hunting, a person is in a situation in which


    they can kill an animal for sustenance.

    3) Therefore, in some cases of hunting it is acceptable for a


    person to kill an animal for sustenance

    Use of Animals in Zoos

    1) If a person is in a situation in which they can save a non-


    human animal, who is at risk for extinction, by putting them in
    captivity then it is morally acceptable for them to do so

    2) In some cases, zoo’s are saving an non-human animal, who is


    at risk for extinction, by putting them in captivity

    3)

    Animal Experimentation

    1) If a person is in a situation in which they have the opportunity


    to to acquire knowledge that is beneficial for other living beings,
    then it is morally acceptable for this person to do so.
    2) In some cases of animal experimentation, a person has the
    opportunity to acquire knowledge that is beneficial for other
    living beings.

    3) Therefore some cases of animal experimentation in which


    knowledge is acquired that benefits other living beings is
    morally acceptable

    Morally obligatory to refrain from eating meat?

    1) If a person is in a situation in which the act of eating a food


    product that when produced causes more harm than good then it
    is morally obligatory to refrain from eating that food product.

    2) In most cases of consumable meat a person is eating a food


    product whose production causes more harm than good.

    3) Therefore

    Regan and Singer ~ Moral Status: Animals having the same


    status as Humans
    1) Something is morally valuable if and only if it is sentient
    2) Many non-human animals are sentient
    3) Therefore, many non-human animals are morally valuable
    4)There is no reasonable way to argue that one morally valuable
    being is more morally valuable than another morally valuable
    being
    5)Therefore, there is no reasonable way to argue that a morally
    valuable human animal is more morally valuable than one of the
    morally valuable non-human animals

    You might also like