Is killing animals , or making them suffer, for human ends morally defensible? - Essay Example

Only on StudentShare

Extract of sample
Is killing animals , or making them suffer, for human ends morally defensible?

My opinion extends to other human activities that put harm animal which are not necessary, such as poaching or game hunting or animal fights. There is a fundamental moral principle which permits us to share a kind of equal treatment that concerns all human beings and with every kind of differences that exist between and every one of us. I believe that this moral code is not only limited to human beings, but also to other living sentient beings in our environment. I believe that respect for life even extends to non-human living organisms and that animals have every right to be treated with much care and equanimity as we do with a fellow human being. Even if non-human animals are lacking superior and complex rational faculties and capabilities compared to humans, their existence is something to be valued and not to be brushed aside so brusquely. If one were to look at it, an average person would rather dismiss the issue of animal rights while not being able to sit down and swallow the problems of racial discrimination. The reason behind this is that people in general, most of the time ignorantly or unintentionally, have speciesism as part of their mindset. Speciesism could be defined as the belief that one kind of species among all other members of the group is more superior to the rest, therefore the rationale for dominance, subjugation or annihilation of the superior specie against the more inferior. ...
Download paper

Summary

Is killing animals, or making them suffer, for human ends morally defensible? People have always needed animals for various reasons for the sake of either necessity or convenience. I believe animals exist to help humanity survive and get by with life with less hardship as possible…
Author : araynor

Related Essays

Mercy killing.
The terminology mercy killing on the other hand refers to someone taking a direct action to terminate the life of a patient without permission from the patient. The decision to take such an action is usually made on the assumption that the patient’s life is no longer meaningful or that if the patient was in a position to say so, he would express his desire to die (Padilla 219). The distinction between mercy death and mercy killing is that mercy death is voluntary and is conducted with the permission of the patient and often at his request while mercy killing is involuntary and does not...
8 pages (2008 words) Essay
Non-Human Animals
He finishes it off with the fact that nonhuman wildlife can be regarded as no more than machineries with chunks brought together in complex ways. Centered on Descartes’ underlying principle, human beings have a very little accountability to other natures or the natural world, unless their behavior has an emotional impact on other humans. (Hergenhahn, 2005, pp. 164). Rene Descartes, seemingly believed that wildlife were, as a matter of fact, vague from nonliving objects in that animals were not emotional —they were purely not creatures who were sensible, had individual and perceptual...
4 pages (1004 words) Term Paper
Discuss the Moral Considerations Relevant to the Killing of Human Being
According to those who oppose this practice, they argue that the foetus is a human being or a person from the time of conception. Hence terminating it is the same as killing a human being which in itself is not moral. The foetus acquires human characteristics remarkably early in its life such that by the tenth week, it already has acquired a face, arms, and also fingers and toes. Also, the internal organs and the brain activity can be detected by this time. As every human has the right to life, also does the foetus. Every woman has the right to decide what should be happening in...
6 pages (1506 words) Essay
Non-human Animals Can Be Agents of Morality
From de Waal’s account, it is evident that animals especially chimpanzees can actually be moral agents. The basic concept in understanding the ability of animals to be moral agents is the evaluation of how human morality is distinguished from chimpanzee “morality”. De Waal envisages that human morality develops from the morality of our common ancestors. Morality emerges gradually, becoming more complex over time, but human morality is different in degree, not in kind, to the “morality” of other primates. Philip Kitcher, Christine Korsgaard, and Peter Singer in their book Philosophers...
3 pages (753 words) Essay
morally permissible for abortion
In this article, two basic assertions will be fortified – one that there are no good grounds to believe that abortion is morally incorrect and secondly, that there are good causes to prove that abortion is morally permissible. Providing a brief critique of a known pro-life argument is deemed necessary before we proceed with the construction of an argument for the moral permissibility of abortion. The eminent anti-abortion philosopher Marquis has stated that “the future of a standard fetus includes a set of experiences, projects, activities, and such which are identical with the futures of...
3 pages (753 words) Essay
Is it unethical to test on animals,even if the testing helps save human lives?
It is this conceptual framework that leads to the argument: Is it unethical to test on animals, even if the testing helps save human lives? One is convinced that the rationale for ethically justifying testing on animals should not solely be based on saving human lives, but also in considering the selection, procedures, conditions, and purpose or intent, within which animals are tested to serve the paramount purpose of saving lives. The current discourse would therefore be presented by initially presenting the arguments which state that animal testing is unethical, even if the testing helps...
4 pages (1004 words) Essay
Equality for Animals?
In case of animals the mental or psychological aspect do not play much role. This differentiation has not been made because the animal equality is based mainly on physical torment aspect. He author mentions the point “not have interests because it cannot suffer” but here it is not clear as to what kind of interest he is talking of. The explanation provided in this context is ambiguous because talking of experiments on mice, it is essential in human interests. The author has not talked of conflict of interests or what decision should be taken when there is such a conflict. What interest can...
11 pages (2761 words) Essay
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you! Try us!