Animal Rights and Human Obligations Edited by Tom Regan and Peter Singer Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1976, vi + 250 pp.

Philosophy ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 53 (206) ◽  
pp. 576-577
Author(s):  
John Benson
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Tom Regan

scholarly journals O moralnych obowiązkach ludzi wobec zwierząt. Etyka Gary’ego Francione

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-106
Author(s):  
Dorota Probucka
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Animal Rights Movement ◽  
Human Interest ◽  
Biological Trait ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
Tom Regan

The purpose of my article is to present and analyze the ethical views of Gary Francione – the leading, contemporary representative of the Animal Rights Movement. He built his theory by criticizing the views of two other supporters of the idea of animal liberation: Peter Singer and Tom Regan. In his opinion, neither of these philosophers did not escape from the anthropocentric paradigm binding the moral obligations to animals with the primacy of human interest. Singer believed that only humans have the ability to plan their own future, and only they want to live and extend their own existence. While according to Regan, in conflict situations, respect for human interest should be dominant. Francione agrees that only people understand a deeper meaning of their own existence, but it does not follow that only they want to live and do not want to die. The need to preserve and continue life is not the result of mental states, but it is a consequence of sensitivity – the biological trait which aims to safeguard and continuation of life. According to Francione, if every sensitive creature has an interest in preserving his own life and avoiding suffering it they also have a moral right to life and not being treated in a cruel manner.

scholarly journals Animal Ethics: Beyond Neutrality, Universality, and Consistency

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 34-45
Author(s):  
Sreetama Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Animal Experimentation ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Jeremy Bentham ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Tom Regan ◽  
Power Hierarchy

This paper reflects a possibility of going beyond the postmodernists’ way of ethically examining non-human animals based on the tripartite pillars of neutrality, universality, and consistency. My concentration focuses on some interrelated queries, such as – What does animal ethics conventionally mean? How did power, hierarchy, and domination separate humans from other animals? How does the fate of non-human animals (whether they ought to be morally considered or not) depend on humans’ moral values? How far is it justified to secure animal rights in the age of perilous animal use, especially for food or during animal experimentation? While examining these issues, I bring into light the several arguments and positions put forward by thinkers such as Jeremy Bentham, Peter Singer, Tom Regan, Carl Cohen, Brian Berry, and others. Moreover, my search is for a non-anthropocentric sustainable paradigm, to balance human interests and animal needs together, in order to sustain the future generations of human and non-human intimacy.  

scholarly journals Animal welfare versus animal abolitionism: a comparison of the theories by Peter Singer and Tom Regan and their influence on the Brazilian Federal Constitution

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 251
Author(s):  
Amanda Formisano Paccagnella ◽  
Patricia Borba Marchetto
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Philosophical Foundations ◽  
The Awakening ◽  
Abolitionist Movement ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Tom Regan ◽  
Animal Abolitionism

With the emergence of environmental concerns and the awakening regarding animal treatment issues, the anthropocentric paradigm has begun to shift, causing many countries to review their position on the legal status of animals. Within the movement for animals, there are two mainly followed philosophical theories: the animal welfare perspective, which has Peter Singer as its leading author, and the animal rights theory, likewise known as the abolitionist movement, with Tom Regan as its central theorist. Utilizing the method of comparative analysis, this article seeks to analyze each author’s thought process and compare theories, contrasting each viewpoint’s moral and philosophical foundations and which principle each author has determined as most fundamental. The main differences between them will also be compared, as well as their conclusions and effects on society, with a particular focus on their influences on the Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988. 

The Oxford Group and the Emergence of Animal Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Garner ◽  
Yewande Okuleye
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Intellectual Development ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Animal Rights Movement ◽  
Friendship Group ◽  
University Of Oxford ◽  
Short Period ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Oxford Group ◽  
The University

This book is an account of the life and times of a loose friendship group (later christened the Oxford Group) of ten people, primarily postgraduate philosophy students, who attended the University of Oxford for a short period of time from the late 1960s. The Oxford Group, which included—most notably—Peter Singer and Richard Ryder, set about thinking about, talking about, and promoting the idea of animal rights and vegetarianism. The group therefore played a role, largely undocumented and unacknowledged, in the emergence of the animal rights movement and the discipline of animal ethics. Most notably, the group produced an edited collection of articles published as Animals, Men and Morals in 1971 that was instrumental in one of their number—Peter Singer—writing Animal Liberation in 1975, a book that has had an extraordinary influence in the intervening years. The book serves as a case study of how the emergence of important work and the development of new ideas can be explained, and, in particular, how far the intellectual development of individuals is influenced by their participation in a creative community.

scholarly journals Fundamentação ética dos direitos animais. O legado de Humphry Primatt

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sônia T. FELIPE
Keyword(s):  
Peter Singer ◽  
De Se ◽  
Tom Regan

Apresento, neste artigo, as teses centrais, extraídas da argumentação de<br />Humphry Primatt, elaborada em 1776, em The Duty of Mercy, em defesa da coerência<br />moral humana na consideração da dor e do sofrimento de animais humanos e nãohumanos.<br />Os argumentos de Primatt, críticos à filosofia moral tradicional, por seu<br />antropocentrismo, e radicais no emprego do princípio da igualdade, contrário a<br />todas as formas de discriminação moral, são hoje centrais à ética de Peter Singer, Tom Regan e Richard D. Ryder, e sustentam a proposta de se estabelecer um novo<br />estatuto jurídico para os animais. Se os animais estão sujeitos à inflição de dor e<br />sofrimento, por parte de humanos, devem ser incluídos, como sujeitos de direitos, no<br />âmbito da proteção legal constitucional, tese defendida por Gary L. Francione e<br />Steven M. Wise.

scholarly journals Czy zwierzętom przysługują prawa? Na marginesie książek Toma Regana i Petera Singera

Etyka ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 147-168
Author(s):  
Jan Narveson
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
General View ◽  
Peter Singer ◽  
Human Species

The views of Peter Singer, and various authors in the Singer and Regan anthology Animal Rights and Human Obligations, are explored. Their case against „speciesism”, that only members of the human species are eligible for moral considerations, is accepted, but the further inference that a1nimałs have strong rights, especially not to be killed for food, is questioned. Utilitarianism would, for example, seem to have room for the eating of animals, though rather precariously. However, the general view of morality which is argued to make best sense of our inclination to think that eating animals is permissible is a contractarian/egoist one. This makes it obvious that we have no obligations to animals, since we need incur none (and can’t anyway, owing to lack of communication); at the same time it

The Case for Animal Rights

Dialogue ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh Lehman
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Toxicity Tests ◽  
Wild Animals ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Moral Condemnation ◽  
Tom Regan

In his previous papers written on the topic of animal rights, Tom Regan argued that on the assumption that certain human beings have moral rights then so do certain animals. Here the argument is carried a stage further; Regan argues that some animals have certain moral rights. For the most part the book is taken up with criticizing alternative views concerning our moral obligations to animals and explaining and defending “The Rights View”. In the final chapter, Regan draws out the implications ofthe rights view. These include arguing for an obligation to be a vegetarian, moral condemnation of hunting and trapping of wild animals as well as of most of the uses of animals for scientific purposes. Animals are not to be used for toxicity tests, in education contexts or in scientific research even though this may produce beneficial consequences for humans and other animals. The book is very clearly written and well argued. It covers all important positions and arguments related t o the question of our moral obligations to animals. It is, I believe, the best book to appear on this subject to date.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document