Tom reagans push for animal rights as described in the article the case for animal rights

Let those who are the victims of injustice suffer as they will. Regan uses this criterion to ground his case for the basic rights of animals. Cruelty fares no better.

Moreover, to insure that we do not pave the way for such injustices as slavery or sexual discrimination, we must believe that all who have inherent value have it equally, regardless of their sex, race, religion, birthplace, and so on.

How might this narrow view be defended? Only your feelings do. If an individual possesses a moral right, that right may not be sacrificed even if the consequences of doing so are appealing.

Secondly, having set out the broad outlines of the rights view, I can now say why its implications for farming and science, among other fields, are both clear and uncompromising. Most of the details of the supporting argument are missing.

Lay down your weapons. Any being with a complex mental life, including perception, desire, belief, memory, intention, and a sense of the future--among other attributes, and which Regan spends much time exploring--is a subject of a life.

Only if we are willing to make the same judgment in the case of humans who are similarly deficient. Here is an analogy to help make the philosophical point clearer: The great appeal of utilitarianism rests with its uncompromising egalitarianism: It is not just refinement or reduction that is called for, not just larger, cleaner cages, not just more generous use of anesthetic or the elimination of multiple surgery, not just tidying up the system.

Why, then, not kill my Aunt Bea? The second principle a utilitarian accepts is that of utility: I have, then, according to contractarianism, no duty directly to your dog or any other animal, not even the duty not to cause them pain or suffering; my duty not to hurt them is a duty I have to those people who care about what happens to them.

That is very well and good for the signatories but not so good for anyone who is not asked to sign. That would be to sanction the disrespectful treatment of the individual in the name of the social good, something the rights view will not — categorically will not —ever allow.Video Tom Regan, A Case for Animal Rights Tom Regan has written or edited more than twenty books and numerous articles on animal rights.

Various writings of Tom Regan. Jan 15,  · Tom Regan is Professor of philosophy at North Carolina State University and a leading animal rights advocate. His best known work is in the form of his book The Case for Animal Rights (). Regan's position on animal rights and how it differs from that of Singer's.

Regan disagrees with Singer's utilitarian program for animal liberation.

""The Case for Animal Rights "is beyond question the most important philosophical contribution to animal rights and is a major work in moral philosophy."--"Animal Law Review" Read more From the Inside Flap/5(14).

Defending Animal Rights by Tom Regan Lisa Kemmerer cheers on Tom Regan as he defends the idea of animals having rights. Amongst ethical topics, animal rights is perhaps the hottest, most divisive, and least understood. Chapter Three, ‘The Case for Animal Rights’, relates back to Regan’s groundbreaking book of the same name.

THE CASE FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS By Tom Regan From: ANIMAL RIGHTS AND HUMAN OBLIGATIONS Edited by Tom Regan and Peter Singer.

Second edition Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, InAmerican philosopher Tom Regan published a book called The Case for Animal Rights, which has since become an important text in animal rights theory. Before I explain Dr. Regan's views, I.

Download
Tom reagans push for animal rights as described in the article the case for animal rights
Rated 4/5 based on 65 review