The Moral Status of Animals

Kant, Singer, Steinbock

Kant: animals are not our equals

IN

OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

• self-aware, moral• so have dignity, are owed respect• should employ categorical

imperative in dealing with each other

OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

• we have duties to each other

• we have no duties to animals

OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

Humans can have indirect duties to humans involving animals OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

Case 1. Ann promised Betty to feed her cat

OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

Case 2. Ann should avoid cruelty to kitty so she won’t later be cruel to fellow humans OUT

Kant: animals are not our equals

IN

OUT

We should be kind to animalsfor our own sake

Singer: All Animals Are Equal

Why are all animals equal? What does “equality” mean?

SINGER’S POSITION IN 10 STEPS

STEP 1: WHAT EQUALITY DOESN’T MEAN

We can see from examining gender and race equality that equality of Xs and Ys doesn’t mean 1. Factual equality2. Exactly equal treatment3. Exactly equal rights

So equality of species doesn’t mean any of the above, and isn’t patently absurd.

STEP 2: WHAT EQUALITY DOES MEAN

“’Each to count for one and none for more than one.’ In other words, the interests of every being affected by an action are to be taken into account and given the same weight as the like interests of any other being.” (p. 279)

He calls this the Principle of Equality (POE)

STEP 3: PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY APPLIES JUST TO SENTIENT CREATURES

”The capacity for suffering and enjoyment is a prerequisite for having any interests at all, a condition that must be satisfied before we can speak of interests in a meaningful way.” (p. 281)

POE applies to all animals that feel painPOE doesn’t apply to anything else

STEP 4: POE SAYS TO GIVE LIKE INTERESTS LIKE CONSIDERATION

HUMAN DOG

OUCH OUCH

OUCH OUCH

OUCH OUCH

STEP 5: SPECIESISM IS A BIAS IN FAVOR OF ONE’S OWN SPECIES, LIKE RACISM AND SEXISM

HUMAN DOG

OUCH OUCH

OUCH OUCH

OUCH OUCH

MATTERSMORE IN EVERY CASE?

STEP 5: HUMANS OFTEN HAVE EXTRA INTERESTS … BUT NOT ALWAYS

Capture humans in parks for a painful experiment

Capture dogs in parks for a painful experiment

Use retarded orphaned babies for a painful experiment

PAINFEAR, APPREHENSION

PAIN PAIN

Singer: speciesist to differentiate

Singer: NOT speciesist to differentiate

STEP 6: SINGER IS A UTILITARIAN

Should we do such an experiment? Yes, if it maximizes total happiness. We should not choose our experimental subjects in a racist, sexist, OR speciesist way.

Animal RIGHTS philosophers say we should never experiment on animals.

STEP 7: HUMAN LIVES OFTEN HAVE MORE VALUE

“This does not mean that to avoid speciesism we must hold that it as wrong to kill a dog as it is to kill a normal human being.” (p. 283)

COSTS OF KILLING A NORMAL HUMAN BEING

COSTS OF KILLING A NORMAL DOG

High self awarenessPlans for futureFamily ties

No self awarenessNo plansFewer ties

SINGER:WORSE

STEP 8: HUMAN LIVES DON’T ALWAYS HAVE MORE VALUE

COSTS OF KILLING A RETARDED OR SENILE HUMAN

COSTS OF KILLING A NORMAL CHIMPANZEE OR DOLPHIN

No self awarenessNo plansFewer ties

High self awarenessPlans for futureFamily ties

SINGER:WORSE

STEP 9: THE RETARDED ORPHAN TEST

“As long as we remember that we should give the same respect to the lives of animals as we give to the lives of those humans at a similar mental level, we shall not go wrong.” (p. 285)

STEP 10: IMPLICATIONS

VegetarianismShould rarely use animals in medical experimentsShould stop using leather, etc.Should avoid zoos, circuses, aquariums, rodeos

These implications and many others are worked out in ANIMAL LIBERATION.

Lifeboat Problems

(Singer’s analysis)

Case 1: Thirsty Us (PAIN)

• Our class is on a lifeboat. Trip to shore takes 2 hours, our lives are not threatened.

• We’re painfully thirsty and have a limited supply of water.

• Singer says: when we distribute the water, we must avoid sexism and racism; we should apply principle of equality*

* Principle of equality: equal interests should be given equal consideration (in other words, to each according to his/her interests)

Case 2: Thirsty Us + Dog (PAIN)• Our class is on a lifeboat

with a dog. Trip to shore takes 2 hours, our lives are not threatened.

• We’re painfully thirsty and have a limited supply of water.

• Singer: we must avoid sexism, racism and speciesism; we should apply principle of equality

• Dog’s pain matters as much as ours; should share water with dog * Principle of equality: equal interests

should be given equal consideration (in other words, to each according to his/her interests)

Case 3: Endangered Us (LIFE AND DEATH)• Our class is on a lifeboat.

Our weight is excessive, we’re starting to sink.

• Someone must be thrown overboard or we’ll all die.

• Singer: must decide without sexism and racism; should apply principle of equality.

* Principle of equality: equal interests should be given equal consideration (in other words, to each according to his/her interests)

Case 4: Endangered Us + Dog (LIFE AND DEATH)• Our class is on a lifeboat

with a dog. Our weight is excessive, we’re starting to sink.

• Someone must be thrown overboard or we’ll all die.

• Singer: must avoid sexism, racism, and speciesism; should apply principle of equality

• Singer: less good ahead in dog’s life; NOT speciesist to throw dog.

* Principle of equality: equal interests should be given equal consideration (in other words, to each according to his/her interests)

Case 4: Endangered Us + Dog• Not speciesist to throw

dog IF you’re equally willing to throw George

• QUESTION: Is it speciesist to care more about George? Is it right to care more about George?

* Principle of equality: equal interests should be given equal consideration (in other words, to each according to his/her interests)

George is mentally comparable to the dog

Steinbock

(A reply to Singer)

Why humans are special

1. Human beings can be held responsible for what they do

2. Human beings can reciprocate3. Human beings desire self-respect

LIFE AND DEATH Case 4 – Endangered Us + Dog

• Human lives matter more• Should throw dog overboard, speciesism is

OK, not like racism or sexism• Singer AGREES about dog, but says “not

speciesist”!

PAINCase 2 – Thirsty Us + Dog

• Steinbock says human pain matters more• Why? Because pain interferes with exercise of

capacities, and human have better capacities• Singer DISAGREES

OSorry Fido, our thirst is a bigger problem than

yours!

George

• Same capacities as dog, so should we treat him like dog?

• Steinbock—there are lots of legitimate reasons to care more about George (extra protectiveness for the dependent and impaired)

George is mentally comparable to the dogWe’ll take

care of you, George!