Tom Regan's Position
An Argumentative essay that looks at and breaks down the philosophical difference between Tom Regan’s position on Animal rights and, Peter Singer’s position on Animal liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals.
This paper deals with the converse positions on Animal rights or Animal Liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals. From the philosophical position of Animal rights Regan argues, that is humans have the ability to have moral rights, so should animals. On the other hand, Singer’s philosophical position is the liberation of animals. He argues that attributing rights to animals is not. the only way of changing their moral status Thus we can see the distinction between the two is one of a philosophical difference, of Utilitarianism and the humanistic value of moral rights.
Tom Regan’s position on animal rights
To begin, we shall go over Tom Regan and his perspective on Animal rights. For example we look at Regan’s essay titled “ The rights of Humans and Animals’’. …show more content…
That is to say if we are not consciously aware of ourselves as sentient beings, with no more reason to exist than those who cannot speak for themselves, we will continue to live in a plethora of ignorance, allowing for the atrocities that are inflicted on animals everyday in factory farms, laboratories, held captive for our own selfish desires and put on display as if they are bottles of wine. Granted, to initially start making the movement towards animal liberation would take decades to fully take hold. Humans fear change, this enables us to go into fight or flight mode, with unfortunately most of us on the path of
This paper deals with the converse positions on Animal rights or Animal Liberation as a basis for better treatment of animals. From the philosophical position of Animal rights Regan argues, that is humans have the ability to have moral rights, so should animals. On the other hand, Singer’s philosophical position is the liberation of animals. He argues that attributing rights to animals is not. the only way of changing their moral status Thus we can see the distinction between the two is one of a philosophical difference, of Utilitarianism and the humanistic value of moral rights.
Tom Regan’s position on animal rights
To begin, we shall go over Tom Regan and his perspective on Animal rights. For example we look at Regan’s essay titled “ The rights of Humans and Animals’’. …show more content…
That is to say if we are not consciously aware of ourselves as sentient beings, with no more reason to exist than those who cannot speak for themselves, we will continue to live in a plethora of ignorance, allowing for the atrocities that are inflicted on animals everyday in factory farms, laboratories, held captive for our own selfish desires and put on display as if they are bottles of wine. Granted, to initially start making the movement towards animal liberation would take decades to fully take hold. Humans fear change, this enables us to go into fight or flight mode, with unfortunately most of us on the path of