Theory
conceptual framework for explaining a set of facts/concepts.
Moral theory
explains the basis for right and wrong.
- Good theories offer a system that covers all morality.
The greatest happiness principle (GHP):
An action is morally right if doing it produces more overall happiness for all concerned than not doing it, or doing some alternative action.
Utilitarianism
- Happiness=pleasure, absence of pain
- Consequences are what we consider when judging the morality of actions.
- EVERYONE’S happiness counts equally.
Liberation campaigns (96)
- A mental switch is necessary—challenge to dominant ideology.
- Women’s rights mocked as just as implausible as animal rights (97).
Basic Principle of Equality
- Does not imply that we have to treat every group IDENTICALLY.
- It does imply equality of consideration (of comparable interests).
- Discuss abortion, voting etc. (97).
- So, let’s be consistent . . . Find the moral basis for opposing discrimination and see whether it applies to animals too (98).
What does Singer mean by the “principle of equality?”
Do not rest the case for equal rights on actual equality (98)
- Still would not rule out other forms of anti-equality (IQ)
- Even if there are differences in races and sexes, we still want to say it would be wrong to discriminate (98).
- What do you make of Singer’s overall comparison of treatment of animals to racism and sexism? Are there are any important differences?
Having INTERESTS key to deserving moral consideration (100).
- A necessary condition for having interests is the capacity for pleasure and pain (sentience).
- Beings who can’t feel pleasure or pain don’t care about what happens to them.
SENTIENCE
Beings who can feel pain automatically have a minimal interest in not suffering.
- The capacity for pleasure and pain is THE morally relevant characteristic that draws the line between those how can be morally wronged and those who cannot.
- “If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration” (100).
Speciesism
“A prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species?” (100).
Foundations of Singer’s Approach
- A being deserves equal consideration if and only if it has interests. Dwell on this!
- If a being has interests, then it is sentient.
- If a being is sentient, then it is capable of pleasure and pain.
4 Implied: utilitarian principle that we are morally obligated to maximize pleasure and minimize pain.
Deserves moral consideration >
has interests
Has interests >
has capacity to feel pleasure and pain.
Capacity for pleasure and pain >
sentience
Deserves moral consideration >
sentience
Eating and Experimenting
Treat similar cases similar ways.
- Does the pleasure we get from eating animals override their interest in not suffering?
Experimenting:
- Why not experiment on humans? (101).
- Consider the argument from marginal cases.
Frankena’s View
Argument: humans deserve special consideration because they are capable of pursuing satisfying, good lives by using their powers of thought.
- Does every human have this capability?
- What about intellectually defective humans? (102).
- Does every non-human lack it?
Human Dignity
- Why do humans possess inherent dignity?
- Great Chain of Being, with humans near the top.
Human Dignity: contemporary view
all humans have intrinsic dignity just because . . .
Because they are a member of a species? What makes that species so special: rationality? (103).
Benn’s Argument
The “rationality” of human beings is the norm—it is what gives them their special status.
Even if the characteristics of humans and animals overlap, a human does not become a member of another species when he/she lacks normal human traits.
Singer asks (response to Benn)
why would it be unfair to experiment on a defective human just because he/she is a human, but not a dog? Isn’t this just preference of one’s own species? (104-105).
