Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Case for Animal Rights is a 1983 book by the American philosopher Tom Regan, in which the author argues that at least some kinds of non-human animals have moral rights because they are the "subjects-of-a-life", and that these rights adhere to them whether or not they are recognized. [1]
Daniel Dombrowski writes that the argument can be traced to Porphyry's third-century treatise On Abstinence from Eating Animals. [7] Danish philosopher Laurids Smith who was familiar with the arguments of Wilhelm Dietler argued against the idea that animals cannot possess rights because they cannot understand the ideas of right and duty.
Animal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth independent of their utility to humans, and that their most basic interests—such as avoiding suffering—should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. [2]
[3] [5] He noted that zoo animals are protected from predation. [6] [7] Tzachi Zamir has described the book as an attempt to "forge a link between an animal-right perspective and a welfare-based argument for the existence of (good) zoos". [8] Bostock assigned moral rights to animals as they are conscious beings. [5] He rejected utilitarianism. [9]
Responses from animal ethicists and rights advocates have been varied. Some have rejected the claim that animal rights as a position implies that we are obligated to prevent predation, [4] [5] while others have argued that the animal rights position does imply that predation is something that we should try to avert. [6]
Actor, animal rights activist, narrator of Earthlings (2005) and Dominion (2018) [129] James Rachels: 1941–2003 United States Philosopher [130] Tom Regan: 1938–2017 United States Professor emeritus of philosophy at North Carolina State University, author of The Case for Animal Rights (1983) [131] Qiu Renzong: ca. 1933 China: Bioethicist [132]
Animal Rights Zone. April 24, 2010. Archived from the original on October 30, 2015 And though I don't use the phrase 'animal rights' I certainly do argue that one species' desire should not trump another species' right to live free from harm. Stafford, Jessi (February 24, 2012).
Animal protectionism is a position within animal rights theory that favors incremental change in pursuit of non-human animal interests. It is contrasted with abolitionism , the position that human beings have no moral right to use animals, and ought to have no legal right, no matter how the animals are treated.