A Philosophical View of Animal Rights :: Philosophy Animal Rights Equality Essays

A Philosophical View of Animal Rights Should animals be harmed to benefit mankind? This pressing question has been round for at least the past two centuries. During the early nineteenth century, animal experiments emerged as an important method of science and, in fact, marked the birth of experimental physiology and neuroscience as we currently know it. There were, however, guidelines that existed even back then which restricted the conditions of experimentation. These early rules protected the animals, in the sense that all procedures performed were done so with as little pain as possible and solely to investigate new truths. Adopting the animals? perspectives, they would probably not agree that these types of regulations were much protection, considering the unwanted pain that they mat up first followed by what would ultimately be their death. But, this is exactly the ethical issue at hand. For the most part, animal rights are debated in regards to two issues 1) whether anim als have the magnate to rationalize or go through a logical thought process and 2) whether or not animals are able to experience pain. However, ?it will not do simply to cite differences between humans and animals in order to provide a rational basis for excluding animals from the scope of our moral deliberations? (Rollin 7). This, Bernard Rollin claims, would be silly. He says that to do this is comparable to a person with a full head of hair excluding all bald men from his moral deliberations simply because they are bald. The legitimate ethical question involved is, ?do these differences serve to justify a moral difference (Rollin 7). Also, which differences between humans and non-humans are significant enough to be considered in determining the non-human?s fate? Over the years, many differences have been proposed. Some theorize that rights consider upon the ability to possess interest, which in turn depend upon the ability to form verbal formulations, for example. If this were so, then it would rule out the possibility of rights for most animals, with maybe the exception of some primates. But, as Rodd states, ?beings incapable of possessing genuine rights exponent possess moral status in virtue of other qualities, such as the capacity for suffering? (Rodd 4). So, it is easily seen how many views have accumulated oer time. The task of determining animal rights has also come into the context of examining these inherent differences on qualitative and quantitative levels.