Jump to content

Animal rights: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Larry_Sanger (talk)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Animal rights''' are rights, or alleged rights, thought to be enjoyed by some or all [[animals]]. So-called animal rights advocates maintain that animals have the rights not to be killed without reason, the right not to be eaten, and the right not to be physically abused (please elaborate).
'''Animal Rights'''






(More about the animal rights movement.)
The rights perceived to be enjoyed by some or all [[animals]]. Typically these might include the right not to be killed without reason, the right not to be eaten, the right not to be physically abused (please elaborate).






'''Animal rights in [[philosophy]]'''
(More about the animal rights movement.)





''Animal rights in [[philosophy]]''


Among the most famous philosophical proponents of animal rights are the philosophers [[Peter Singer]] and [[Tom Regan]], who holds views that have much in common, but with different philosophical justifications.
Among the most famous philosophical proponents of animal rights are the philosophers [[Peter Singer]] and [[Tom Regan]], who holds views that have much in common, but with different philosophical justifications.
Line 25: Line 23:




See also: [[Tom Regan]], [[Peter Singer]], [[speciesism]], [[vegetarianism]]


See also: [[Tom Regan]], [[Peter Singer]], [[Speciesism]], [[Vegetarianism]]





Revision as of 22:30, 4 January 2002

Animal rights are rights, or alleged rights, thought to be enjoyed by some or all animals. So-called animal rights advocates maintain that animals have the rights not to be killed without reason, the right not to be eaten, and the right not to be physically abused (please elaborate).


(More about the animal rights movement.)


Animal rights in philosophy


Among the most famous philosophical proponents of animal rights are the philosophers Peter Singer and Tom Regan, who holds views that have much in common, but with different philosophical justifications.


Although Singer is said to be one of the ideological founders of today's animal rights movement, his philosophical approach to animal's moral status is not based on the conseption of rights, but on minimization of suffering (utilitarianism) and a principle of equal consideration.


Tom Regan, on the other side, claims that non-human animals that are so called "subjects-of-a-life" are bearers of rights like humans, although not neccessarily of the same degree. This means that animals in this class have inherent value as individuals, and cannot merely be considered as means for an end. This is also called a direct duty view on the moral status of non-human animals. According to Regan we should abolish the breeding of animals for food, animal experimentation and commercial hunting.


See also: Tom Regan, Peter Singer, speciesism, vegetarianism


/Talk