What does singer say is wrong with unequal consideration of interests?
To Singer, this racist view is wrong because it involves arbitrarily deeming certain entities interest's as more valuable than others (based on the arbitrary criterion of skin colour). Singer believes that there are no non-arbitrary ways to justify unequal consideration of interests.
How does singer interpret the principle of equality?
How does Singer interpret the principle of equality? -Not a description (every being has the same intellectual, athletic abilities), but a prescription (a claim about HOW we should treat everyone. Giving people equal consideration versus equal treatment.) The interests of everyone morally should be given the same consideration.
What is singer's argument for equal treatment of animals?
Nor is he claiming that these animals should receive equal rights or treatments if he succeeds in proving the equality of such animals. Rather, Singer is arguing for equal consideration of the nature of such animals.
What is an objection to singer's principle?
A possible objection to Singer's principle is that it fails to recognize the moral importance of special relationships (sometimes referred to as agent relative permissions). An important feature of our common sense morality is that we have a stronger duty towards our families and friends than to strangers.
Why does Singer think we should not base moral equality on factual equality?
Singer's Reply: Moral equality does not require factual identity. If it did, since humans are so factually different from each other, they too couldn't be morally equal.
Does equal consideration imply identical treatment Why or why not according to Singer?
Note that equal consideration of interests does not imply identical treatment. For example, equal consideration of men's and women's interests won't imply that men should have a right to elective abortion.
What is Singer's principle of equality?
The principle of equal consideration of interests is a moral principle that states that one should both include all affected interests when calculating the rightness of an action and weigh those interests equally. The term "equal consideration of interests" first appeared in Peter Singer's 1979 book Practical Ethics.
How does Singer argue for extending the principle of equality to animals?
Peter Singer All Animals Are Equal Analysis Peter Singer argues that all animals are equal and that it is not right to eat or kill animals. For the reason that animals are capable of feeling pain and pleasure, they matter and we should consider them as equals.
Does equal consideration imply identical treatment Why or why not according to Singer quizlet?
Singer says that "The basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; it requires equal consideration. Equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights" (278).
Does Singer think all humans are equal?
Conclusion: Singer concludes that “all animals are equal”. That is, as we strive for equality, we should strive for equal consideration of the interests of human beings and non-human animals alike!
What does Singer mean by equal consideration quizlet?
The principle of equal consideration. the interests of every being affected by an action are to be taken into account and given the same weight as the like interests of any other being.
What is Singer's main moral principle?
2. Singer's Principle: But, why is it wrong to save the drowning child? Peter Singer offers a moral principle to support this verdict: Singer's Principle: If we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, then we ought to do so.
How does Singer respond to the argument that humans interest deserve special consideration because of the intrinsic dignity of human beings?
How does Singer respond to the argument that humans' interest deserve special consideration because of the "intrinsic dignity of human beings"? By dismissing the idea of "intrinsic dignity" as a meaningless phrase..
Which moral theory does Singer use to argue that we should treat animals with respect?
Singer, a controversial, Australian philosopher and author of several books and articles on animal rights, is concerned about the proper treatment of animals and refers to his position as “animal liberation” as opposed to “animal rights.” He centers his moral argument on the principle of equal consideration—that each ...
What does Singer mean by all animals are equal?
5:2211:34'All Animals are Equal' by Peter Singer - an overview and analysisYouTubeStart of suggested clipEnd of suggested clipOne if beings are capable of suffering. And they have interests previous to human beings and manyMoreOne if beings are capable of suffering. And they have interests previous to human beings and many non-human animals are capable of suffering conclusion. One therefore human beings and many non-human
Why are all animals equal according to Singer?
What is Singer's basic conclusion in “All Animals Are Equal”? a. All creatures that can suffer deserve equal consideration of their interests, regardless of their species.
Why does Regan think it is wrong to experiment on animals?
Regan believes that animals have the same inherent value as humans so he thinks that it is ALWAYS MORALLY WRONG to experiment on animals. •"Because these animals [in medical experiments] are treated as if their value were reducible to their usefulness to others, they are treated with a lack of respect.".
Why is it wrong to kill Aunt Bea?
1) He assumes that all human beings have the same degree of inherent value. -->Explains why it's wrong to kill Aunt Bea. 2) He believes its impossible to say that ONLY humans have inherent value, or that they have a greater degree of inherent value than other EXPERIENCING SUBJECTS of a life.
What are the characteristics of Singer's arguments against his opponents?
1. don't matter b/c they don't make pain more painful. 2.
Is Singer a utilitarian?
Depends on if the animal suffering and death is outweighed by the benefit to others. -Singer is a utilitarian. - Is probably not outweighed, but can be justified in some cases. Singer is OK with PolyFace farm's practices, but does not think wide-scale use is practical.
Can you justify experimenting on animals?
1)You can justify experimenting on animals if the benefits outweigh the costs. -->Animal suffering is probably not outweighed, but could be justified in some cases. 2)If it's OK to experiment on animals then it must also be OK to experiment on humans with similar mental capacities.
What is the conclusion of Animal Liberation?
To conclude the first chapter of Animal Liberation, Singer, believing that he has successfully posed a valid and convincing argument for the principle of equality amongst all sentient beings based on the infliction of pain and suffering on said beings, turns to the topic of killing nonhuman sentient beings.
What are some examples of experiments Singer did?
An example of this is Martin Reite of the University of Colorado, who conducted deprivation experiments on bonnet monkeys and pigtailed macaques.
What is it called when you believe your gender is superior to the opposite gender?
Similarly, those who believe their gender to be superior to the opposite gender are called sexists. When formulating his argument, Singer takes the equal consideration a step further, adding that all animals both human and nonhuman alike should be considered equal.
What does Peter Singer say about animals?
In chapter one of Animal Liberation, Peter Singer starts off by asserting that all animals are equal; this includes human animals such as man and woman, as well as nonhuman animals such as beasts. In doing so, he is not making the claim that these animals are equal in their capacities, such as reasoning, appearance, ability, or opportunities.
What is the monkey equilibrium platform?
"It consists of a platform that can be made to pitch and roll like an airplane. The monkeys sit in a chair that is part of the platform. In front of them is a control stick, by means of which the platform can be returned to a horizontal position" (25). The point of this experiment is fiction. The experimenters wanted to see how long the monkeys can continue to 'fly' after being exposed to lethal or sublethal doses of radiation or to chemical warfare agents.
What is the purpose of chapter 3 of Animal Liberation?
Chapter three of Singer's Animal Liberation is all about how animals are massively produced on factory farms for human consumption. It relates how many people do not see the connection between the food they eat on their plate and the animal which was slaughtered in order to have such food. Not only do people not connect their food to the animals killed in order to obtain the food, people are also ignorant as to the lives the animals live up until the time they are killed. It is the large food producing corporations which have blinded us from the horrors that happen down on the factory farm. This chapter intends to lift the veil.
What does it mean when Singer says "directly funding the suffering of other animals"?
Often times, when the proper research is done and exposed, the general populace will find that they are directly funding the suffering of other animals. If Singer was correct in his first chapter, this means that we are directly impeding on the animal's right to life. pinterest-pin-it.