Running Head: Animal Rights Literature Review
Running Head Animal Rights Literature Review
REVIEW REVISION 2 Animal Rights Literature Review Revision Animal rights movement advocates for animal’s wellbeing, free from pain, cruelty and abuse as they are living beings and they have the right to live in liberty. Abuse of animals has become a major issue worldwide therefore becoming a problem that can be solved only through obtaining a clear comprehension of what the rights entail. Animal rights as a movement challenges the society’s old view that all animals only exist for human use like in experimentation and agriculture (Sunstein, 2003). Despite the comprehension of what animal rights entail, it is crucial for individuals to understand the potential causes of animal abuse. While those who display these practices of viciousness and disregard towards animals must be dissected and, if vital, liberatingly analyzed, they should likewise be considered responsible for their activities, which is done by specific laws and controls the endeavor to forestall animal cruelty.
This way, the harmful effects of animal abuse is lessened and stopped. Many individuals trust that animals do not have rights, and that the general populations who support animal rights are liberals who need to discover different channels for their persuasions while others feel it is our ethical commitment to nurture animals as they cannot act or talk for themselves. According to (Cochrane, 2012), protecting animals is, imperative for some reasons, including the help they provide for plant ecosystems, the emotional and psychological bolster they can offer to people, and the knowledge picked up from the sociological studies of them and therefore they have the right to experience their lives free from exploitation and misery.
Human beings however do take speciesism to extremes, making new species through farming and domestication, invading most climates and environments, and utilizing their intelligence to expand or sort term gains at the detriment of long-term sustainability instead of seeking an end to the rigid legal and moral distinction drawn between “them” and non-human animals, an end to animal use in entertainment and science experiments. Animals have rights to live free of pain, abuse and suffering; they are not ours to experiment on, wear, eat or even use for entertainment purpose. Literature Review The fight against animal brutality, the advocacy of animal rights and the welfare of animals has occurred to some degree over the span of history.
Paper For Above instruction
The animal rights movement has become an increasingly prominent facet of contemporary ethical debates, emphasizing the intrinsic value of animals and advocating for their protection from cruelty and exploitation. Rooted in a long history of evolving perceptions, the movement challenges traditional anthropocentric views that regard animals solely as resources for human use, such as in experimentation, agriculture, and entertainment. This shift has been driven by philosophical, scientific, and societal developments that underscore the moral consideration owed to non-human animals. This paper explores the philosophical foundations, historical evolution, ethical considerations, and ongoing controversies surrounding animal rights, emphasizing their significance in fostering a compassionate and sustainable coexistence between humans and animals.
Philosophical Foundations and Ethical Principles
The philosophical underpinning of the animal rights movement is largely influenced by arguments rooted in utilitarianism and deontological ethics. Jeremy Bentham (1789), a pivotal figure in utilitarian thought, famously questioned whether animals can suffer, asserting that the capacity for suffering, rather than rationality or intelligence, should determine moral consideration. This argument shifted moral focus towards the alleviation of suffering, laying the groundwork for modern animal welfare debates (Singer, 1975). On the other hand, Kantian ethics emphasizes the inherent moral duties humans have towards animals, not because animals possess intrinsic rights themselves, but because cruelty towards animals can desensitize humans and diminish moral regard for fellow humans (Kant, 1785). These philosophical perspectives underpin contemporary advocacy efforts aiming to extend moral consideration and legal protections to animals.
Historical Evolution of Animal Rights
The historical trajectory of animal rights activism traces back to several key milestones. The late 19th and early 20th centuries marked the formal beginning of organized efforts, such as the founding of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) in 1824 in Britain. The publication of Peter Singer's Animal Liberation in 1975 marked a turning point, popularizing the idea that animals deserve moral consideration comparable to humans. Subsequently, organizations like PETA (established in 1980) have been at the forefront of campaigns against animal exploitation in various industries, including factory farming, entertainment, and scientific research (Waldau, 2010). Over recent decades, scientific consensus has increasingly recognized that many non-human animals possess consciousness, capable of experiencing pain and pleasure, further reinforcing the ethical case for animal rights (Broom, 2014).
Controversies and Ethical Dilemmas
The debate over animal rights involves complex controversies, particularly surrounding animal experimentation, dietary choices, and entertainment. Opponents argue that animal research is essential for scientific and medical advancements, citing the benefits to human health. Proponents, however, contend that alternative methods, such as in vitro testing and computer modeling, can replace animal testing, aligning with the ethical imperative to minimize suffering (Hartung, 2009). Similarly, the use of animals in agriculture and entertainment elicits moral questions about speciesism—the assumption of human superiority—and whether such practices can ever be justified ethically (Regan, 1983). These conflicts reflect broader societal tensions between utilitarian gains and deontological rights, necessitating ongoing dialogue and legal reforms to balance human interests with animal welfare (DeGrazia, 2002).
Contemporary Movements and Legal Reforms
Recent developments in animal rights emphasize legal reforms that recognize animals as sentient beings protected under law. The European Union's ban on animal testing for cosmetics and the increasing number of countries enacting legislation against animal cruelty illustrate a shift towards recognizing intrinsic animal rights. Furthermore, veganism and plant-based diets have gained popularity as ethical choices aligned with reducing animal suffering (Lea et al., 2006). The emergence of sanctuary movements and rewilding projects aim to provide refuge and restore habitats for animals affected by human activities. Despite these advances, significant challenges persist, including resistance from industries reliant on animal exploitation and cultural practices rooted in tradition (Roth & Schlangen, 2015). As scientific understanding of animal cognition deepens, advocates argue that moral and legal standards must evolve to reflect this knowledge, fostering a more compassionate and just society.
Conclusion
In summary, the animal rights movement has evolved from early advocacy focused on cruelty prevention to a broader moral recognition of animals as sentient beings deserving of respect and protection. Philosophical debates, scientific discoveries, and societal attitudes continue to shape this dynamic field. Despite ongoing controversies, there is a growing consensus on the moral imperative to minimize animal suffering and promote ethical treatment. As legal and cultural reforms advance, the movement challenges society to reevaluate its relationship with non-human animals, emphasizing compassion, sustainability, and justice for all sentient beings.
References
- Broom, D. M. (2014). Animal welfare, concepts and measurement. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 9(2), 107-116.
- DeGrazia, D. (2002). Animal rights: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
- Hartung, T. (2009). Food for thought: The paradigm shift in safety assessment. ALTEX, 26(3), 175-182.
- Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. (H. J. Paton, Trans.). Harper & Row, 1964.
- Lea, E., Crawford, D., & Worsley, A. (2006). Descriptive profiles of vegetarians and nonvegetarians. Appetite, 46(3), 338-344.
- Singer, P. (1975). Animal Liberation. Random House.
- Regan, T. (1983). The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press.
- Roth, C., & Schlangen, K. (2015). Cultural dimensions in animal welfare: Challenges and opportunities. Society & Animals, 23(1), 49-67.
- Waldau, C. (2010). Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press.