1.) Singer begins his essay with a comparison with black and women’s liberation movements. Why does he make this move rhetorically? What does he want the comparison to do for his case against speciesism?
“One should always be wary of talking of “the last remaining form of discrimination.” If we have
learnt anything from the liberation movements, we should have learnt how difficult it is to be
aware of latent prejudice in our attitudes to particular groups until this prejudice is forcefully
pointed out.”
2.) Why should sentience (utilitarianism) rather than rationality (Kantian ethics) be the marker of moral importance? What beings does this include who rationality would exclude?
Singer grounds the “right” of equality of consideration in sentience, the ability to suffer and enjoy (or to experience happiness). To have interests, a being must be able to suffer and enjoy. A stone has no interests, a mouse does. If a being suffers and enjoys, we must take its interests into account according to Singer.
He writes, “This is why the limit of sentience, . . . , is the only defensible boundary of concern for the interests of others. To mark this boundary by some characteristic like intelligence or rationality would be to mark it in an arbitrary way.
3.) What are the basic outlines of Singer’s argument that animals deserve equality of moral consideration? (see below and explain in your own words)
4.) Please read the following Christian perspective and answer these questions:
How has the biblical concept of “dominion” been used to justify the subjugation and mistreatment of persons and nonhuman animals?
How is it argued that the concept of dominion has been taken out of context?
Through a reinterpretation of the concept of dominion, could Christian ethicists reconcile both the Kantian duty-based approach to morality with the utilitarian approach?
Christian Perspective:
“The Bible does not explicitly support animal rights, but it also does not explicitly support abolition of slavery or equality for women. In fact, historically, the Bible has been used to support many injustices such as slavery, the subjugation of women, and racism. Many Christians today similarly cherry pick and in our opinion misapply selected Biblical passages to excuse abusing and unnecessarily killing animals for nothing more than pleasure and convenience.
It has always been possible to take certain Biblical passages, we believe out of context, to justify nearly any injustice. We believe the Bible can and should be used to inspire us to be compassionate and to serve others. Jesus himself stated, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45)…
Christians often justify animal abuse by citing Genesis 1:26 which gave Adam “dominion” over the animals. However, shortly thereafter God instructed Adam and Eve to eat only plants (Genesis 1:29). “Dominion” obviously does not include using animals for food, and since Eden was paradise, humans were not to harmfully exploit animals, either. Humanity’s dominion over animals should be like the dominion of a good king over his subjects, not like a tyrant’s dominion over miserable subjects. We understand “made in [God’s] image” (Genesis 1:27) to reflect humanity’s capacity to rule over Creation as God would – with compassion (Luke 7:13), mercy (Luke 6:36) and diligence (Proverbs 27:23). We are to count others more important than ourselves (Philippians 2:3).”
https://cara3.morwebcms.com/FAQ
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|