Views...

[IluvABbeef]

I found some interesting things on different views in today's society dealing with things like ethics in the way we veiw animals as a part of us. Most of this stuff I'm actually learning about in school, BTW.

So just for the heck of it, I thought I would post a bit of it:

Utilitarianism view:
• Animals in agriculture may suffer and lack the ability to do things to contribute to their "positive welfare".
• The cost to consumers (in western society) of improving farm animals' welfare is less than the cost to the animals (in terms of suffering) of not improving it.
• Utilitarianism would then say changes should be made…
• Singer (Peter Singer (1946 - ), Professor at Princeton University, USA) proposes going all the way – vegetarianism, as the "cost" of this to humans is less than the "cost" to animals of us not doing it.
• The interest of the animal in going on living may be outweighed by conflicting interests, such as the interests of the future animal that will replace it, and human interests in animal production.
• So if the animal's life is completely humane and killing is painless, then use may be ok.
• Animal experiments vital to human medicine may be morally acceptable if benefits outweigh costs in animal suffering or discomfort.
Problems with this view of "pure" utilitarianism:
• Does not respect the moral value of each individual (human or animal).
• Is killing of humans ok, as long as there is no pain and if person is replaced by another?
• What about experimentation on people? Is this ok?
• Benefits to the many would outweigh the cost to the few…

Animal Rights (Tom Regan)
• We cannot justify good results by using "evil" means that violate an individual's rights.
• An Animal is the "subject of a life", a "conscious creature".
• Unlike the utilitarian view, under the Animal Rights View it is never justified to sacrifice the rights of one individual to benefit another.
• Under this view, it is our duty to protect the right of each individual not to be killed nor deprived of the means necessary to live a good life.
Problems with Rights View?
• How do we handle cases where it is not possible to respect the rights of all individuals?
• What if interests conflict or are mutually exclusive?
• In our society, we frequently waive our rights for the benefit of others – for example, parents forego many "rights" to give their children a better life.
• If as Regan says, defense of self is the only proviso, where do we draw the line?
• How do we define "defense"?
• Is experimentation on animals to cure human disease "defense"?

These are the "primary" views, along with a few others...

 

[IluvABbeef]

Here's some more "lesser known" veiws I've been exposed to in school:

Species-Integrity View
• Not only individuals, but also species must be valued.
• Drastic change of the nature of a species (telos) through breeding is unethical.
• Extinction of a species is wrong.
• Changing the nature (telos) of a species by transgenics is wrong.
Problems with this view?
• Why is the current state of genetic structures "special"?
• Genetic change through mutation, and natural and artificial (breeding) selection is constant and continuous.
• Breeding for increased health is generally thought to be a good thing – how does this fit in?
• How does this benefit individual animals?

Agent-Centered View
• "What is important about our treatment of animals is what it does to us as moral agents."
• We have duties to animals because if we are cruel to animals we are more likely to act wrongfully to humans.
• We should demonstrate care for others, including concern for their pain or suffering…
• Causing suffering to animals demonstrates a flaw of character – "lack of care" – in the person involved. (Kant)
• This view makes room for moral distinctions that play a role in "common sense" ethics – for example: drawing a distinction between pet animals and food animals or pests
Problems with this view?
• Conservative and too easy to justify what we do, particularly if the practice is "traditional".
• Vague: hard to define what is ok and what is not.
• E.g. "Why is experimentation on mice cruel and pest control not cruel?"
• Conflicts between virtues can be difficult.
• E.g.: My desire to end human suffering due to disease allows me to perform experimentation that causes animal suffering.

Hybrid Views
• Distinct from any of above views, but combine parts of two or more of them.
• E.g.: combine utilitarianism with animal rights: certain things one cannot do to animals under any circumstances (those things that "violate" a specified "right"), but as long as we avoid those things, we can cause animals mild distress or inconvenience or even kill animals if sufficiently good results (to humans or other animals) follow.
Problems with Hybrid Views
• Difficult Ethical questions follow: If we can invoke utilitarianism to do these things to animals, why can we not do the same to people under similar circumstances. (hypothetically – experimentation on or killing of mentally handicapped humans!)


Okay, just a side note on this. I personally DO NOT agree with most of the views of what I just posted, as a matter of fact I think some of those who have those sort of views are completely off their rockers (in other words, bullsh**ers .. like animal rights, and hybrid, to name a few). Some of these points are enough to get me on a rampage and start ranting like a madwoman, and I don't wanna start now.
I also understand where a lot of you stand in these type of views (and I wouldn't be surprised if you don't agree with alot of them either). I don't mean to offend anybody with this material, and if I have, sorry. But I just thought that you folks would have comments or the like on this...enough blabbering from me, you get the idea.

ps. sorry for it ending up to be a bit long...both posts...

 

[jw]

You will find probably a lot of views you are presented with are not what you agree with. I did when I was in college. I also let them know I did not agree with them, but I did it in a way that did not cause any tension, except with a few of the other students. You can do this and still make the grades. Just be careful which fights you choose. On my graduation day I was in the office and all my teachers gathered round me and told the office assistant to take our picture so they could remember "our token conservative." I considered that a compliment!!

 

[IluvABbeef]

Sometimes it's hard to resist speaking my mind about the sort of veiws that I read.

The first time I read these views, I got a bit wound up and on the discussion board on the web that has the course I couldn't help but start ranting about PETA and all the other stuff that was all jumbled up in my head.

Now that I read them a second time, after leaving it lie for a bit, I went back to reading them (I had to them study for a midterm :roll: ), and didn't get as bad a reaction as before, though I still shake my head at them though.