Lori Gruen: Why Do Animals Matter?
The two philosophers I explained above comes from both sides of the argument. Lori Gruen perspective shows how animals are sentimental and have interest and well-beings. On the other hand, Rene Descartes believes animals lack a mind and soul and you cannot harm them because they don't possess thoughts and feelings. Although, both Lori and Rene share the same passion they do not come across the same conclusion. If I was to ask them a series of questions on animal ethics there answers would be completely different. Why do animals matter? According to Ethics and animals published by Lori Geurin, animals are important. They are important to us because they help us define ourselves as human. The differences in animals help emphasize the similarities in humans. The father of modern philosophy will address this question differently. Rene Descartes says they are merely bodily and we can use them any kind of way we want. He states that we cannot have relationships with cell phones or backpacks so we cannot have a relationship with animals.
Animals cannot communicate with us. Is this a reason why they are not …show more content…
Why or why not? According to Lori, pain is not a reflex and involves both affective and sensory experiences. She is aware that pain can be a result from a stimulus. However, she explains pain to be subjective and we can not deny that others feel pain because we cannot feel it ourselves. She explains the psychological and behavioral evidence on how pain works. Rene Descartes says they cannot feel pain, hunger, or thirst. Animals does not posses sensations such as hunger and thirst. He explains squealing from pain as an reaction to a stimuli rather than actual pain. Hitting a dog is the input while the noise (squealing) is the output. As mention earlier, descartes believed animals are like machines. However, he thinks both animals and humans are machines made by God. Descartes is saying that you can not harm things that does not obtain
Animals cannot communicate with us. Is this a reason why they are not …show more content…
Why or why not? According to Lori, pain is not a reflex and involves both affective and sensory experiences. She is aware that pain can be a result from a stimulus. However, she explains pain to be subjective and we can not deny that others feel pain because we cannot feel it ourselves. She explains the psychological and behavioral evidence on how pain works. Rene Descartes says they cannot feel pain, hunger, or thirst. Animals does not posses sensations such as hunger and thirst. He explains squealing from pain as an reaction to a stimuli rather than actual pain. Hitting a dog is the input while the noise (squealing) is the output. As mention earlier, descartes believed animals are like machines. However, he thinks both animals and humans are machines made by God. Descartes is saying that you can not harm things that does not obtain