Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you! Try us!

Is it unethical to test on animals,even if the testing helps save human lives? - Essay Example

Only on StudentShare
Masters
Author : cheyenne26
Essay
Philosophy
Pages 4 (1004 words)

Summary

Ethical Issues Involved in Animal Testing Introduction There are a number of controversial issues that still pervade contemporary times. The controversiality of argument depends on the disparities of perspectives, not only of the opposing parties; but more so, on its overall effect to society or humanity…

Extract of sample
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 save human lives. The next section would discuss contentions that view animal testing as ethical. Finally, an analysis and recommendation portion would assert that a balanced argument would justify testing on animals with proposed courses of action. Animal Testing is Unethical The arguments that support the unethical view of animal testing include Tom Regan’s assertions in his written discourse entitled The Case for Animal Rights (University of California Press, 1983) which affirmed that “animals cannot be experimented on, because they are not merely means to an end” (Mukerjee, 1997, p. 87). ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?

Related Essays

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)
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…
9 pages (2259 words)
All Animals are Equal
The case of animals is very similar to those of the exploited people, we must treat them like human beings because even they feel the pain and react to it, and it is our duty to stop these animals from getting exploited and from getting treated like dirt. They have every right in the world to be treated well and to be shown love and affection. All human beings are capable of logical thinking and deciding whether their actions are right or not? Off late there have been numerous issues when the logical thinking of the human beings has come under the scanner. Ethical issues are issues that…
6 pages (1506 words)
Unethical Business Behavior (Monastato company)
Unethical Business Behavior (Monastato company) …
8 pages (2008 words)
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)
equality for animals
The principle of equality can be considered as one of the major concepts used by Singer in his article i.e. ‘equality for animals’. The concept was supported with different notions which define that the term equality should encompass the practice of a clear understanding of the nature along with its principles concerning equal consideration of interests. Moreover, Singer has also mentioned that the concept of principle of equality denotes that individual concerns for others should be prioritized equally irrespective of their ability or what they are like. Singer has also used the concept…
12 pages (3012 words)
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)