Unit 10 - Animal Rights – Article Example
Liberal Animal Rights The animal rights movement is committed to certain goals, including the total abolition of the use of animals in science; 2. the total dissolution of commercial animal agriculture;
3. The total elimination of commercial and sport hunting and trapping.
These seem like stringent measures, but Regan reasons they follow through logical necessity from certain principles. He exerts that wrongs toward animals are embedded in a system that views animals as a material resource, and that all of our duties toward animals are ultimately duties to humanity. We must at least recognize that we have duties to animals, just as we have duties to each other. I do not differ on any of these points.
I do differ on the logic that says you cannot make marked improvement on a problem if you do not change the macro level process. It is agreed that sometimes human treatment of animals is reprehensible, but there is a significant difference between abuse and appropriate practice. Furthermore, there appears to be the notion that metaphysics and ethics do not overlap. Although many philosophers argue that a person should not judge based on what is but only what should be, I attest that a person must know what is to bring forth what should be. You have to know where you are and where your going to direct your improvement.
Although I agree with much of Regan’s thinking, I differ on certain logical and practical points. It is true we have duties toward animals as we do each other, but the only path to improvement is to transform our current system – not its immediate demise.
Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights in PETER SINGER (Ed), In Defense of Animals New York: Basil Blackwell, 1985, pp. 13-26.