Should animals have the same moral consideration as human beings? In his article, “All Animals Are Equal,” Peter Singer (1989) asserts that the same moral equality that human beings claim for one another should also be applied to animals. In other words, he asserts that although not all humans are equal (consider children and persons with severe mental disabilities), they are all given equal consideration because they have an equal capacity for happiness, enjoyment, and suffering. This capacity, called sentience, is a prerequisite for moral consideration. Animals, according to Singer, also should be given equal consideration because of their sentience even though they are not equal in all respects to humans.

Are human beings morally wrong to subject animals capable of experiencing pain and joy to cruelty, scientific experimentation, or captivity? Or are we simply practicing survival of the fittest, as animals do with one another in the wild? Persons in opposition to Singer might take an anthropocentric view, meaning that only humans have intrinsic worth, and thus animals should only be valued so far as they are useful to humans. This value is also known as instrumental value and is often assigned to physical and abstract objects. The questions posed above are not easy questions to answer, but you are encouraged to think critically about how you would justify a position toward animal treatment.

To prepare for this Discussion:

Read Chapter 16, “Environmental Ethics” and Chapter 17, “Animal Rights” in the course text. Focus on the sections on anthropocentrism, sentience, and animal rights.
Read the Singer article “All Animals Are Equal,” and consider whether human beings are morally obligated to treat animals in a particular way and what might constitute the moral treatment of animals.

For this Discussion, your Instructor will either assign groups to threads or direct you to choose one thread from the choices listed this week. If you are directed to choose a thread on your own, follow these instructions: Each thread is limited to a maximum number of students based on class size. A thread will close if the limit is reached. If a thread is closed to new posters, select from the open threads. You will post both your initial post and your response post in the same thread.

Thread 1: Animal Experimentation—Cosmetics

Post by Day 3 1–2 paragraphs explaining whether society is morally obligated to equally consider all sentient beings. Explain whether sentience should be considered when animal experimentation is used to develop cosmetics. Justify your position. Include ethics-related terms in your post, and be sure to support your ideas by connecting them to the week’s Learning Resources. Practice APA style for your in-text citations.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.

Respond by Day 5 to at least two of your colleagues’ postings in the following ways:

Ask a probing question.
Share an insight from having read your colleague’s posting.
Offer and support an opinion.
Validate an idea with your own experience.
Make a suggestion.
Expand on your colleague’s posting

REQUIRED READINGS
MacKinnon, B. (2012). Ethics: Theory and contemporary issues (concise 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Chapter 16, “Environmental Ethics” (pp. 170–185)

These pages present ethical issues related to environmental protection, emphasizing ideas such as determining the intrinsic value of nature and using cost-benefit analyses for making decisions that impact nature. The chapter also explains several environmentalist positions: ecocentrism, deep ecology, and ecofeminism. You may apply the ethical terminology and concepts in this chapter to your analysis of animal rights this week.
Chapter 17, “Animal Rights” (pp. 187–197)

This chapter presents different perspectives regarding the ethical status of animals. The chapter addresses topics such as sentience, animal rights, and animal experimentation.

Singer, P. (1989). All animals are equal. In T. Regan & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal rights and human obligations (pp. 148–162). Retrieved from http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/phil1200,Spr07/singer.pdf
Singer, P. (1989). All animals are equal. In T. Regan & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal rights and human obligations (pp. 148–162). Retrieved from http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/phil1200,Spr07/singer.pdf