...In “The Pain of Animals,” (originally published in 1989) David Suzuki’s subject is the pain humans inflict on animals by using them in scientific experiments, hunting them, and keeping them in zoos. Suzuki’s thesis is that we use animals for these purposes because their bodies, nervous systems, and responses are much like ours. This similarity between humans and animals means, however, that animals feel fear and pain just as we do. Suzuki’s main purpose is to convince us that it is immoral to inflict pain on animals. Suzuki develops this argument first by telling a story about his own changing attitudes towards animals. The “piercing shriek of terror and anguish” (p. 269) of the squirrel he hit with a slingshot convinced him as a teenager that animals feel pain just as we do. His experiences with fishing made him realize that humans, as predators, use animals without thinking of their pain. He began to question our right to use animals without considering their “pain and fear” (p. 270). Suzuki then gives a series of examples of how we inflict pain on animals in zoos and in scientific experiments the most controversial of these involves the treatment of animals that that are most like us: the chimpanzees. He cites from the experience of Jane Goodall and other experts on primates, to suggest that humans seem to think these animals are expendable: that they can be sacrificed for our selfish goals. The details about a film on the suffering...
Words: 304 - Pages: 2
...2012 Animal Experimentation Experimentation done on animals is considered unethical, for some people at least. Not only do animals suffer while being experimented on, they often at times undergo vivisection. Vivisection, in the strictest sense, is the partial or complete dissection of live animals for research purposes (Monamy 6). If humans consider it wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily to other humans, then it should also be unnecessary to inflict pain onto animals. Animals breathe, eat, drink, excreta, reproduce, and can feel pain just as humans can. All animals (including human beings) must be treated identically, for each species has capacities and needs that are peculiar to it and deserve to be taken into account (Fox 64). Animals have sentient just as humans do. A sentient animal not only has an awareness of its surroundings but is capable of experiencing pain (Monamy 6). A quantum extension of ethics was proposed when Peter Singer asserted in Animal Liberation (1975) that moral consideration must transcend the species boundary to include all sentient animals (Monamy 40). Because animals experience pain just as humans do, a law should be passed where experiments on animals should be interdicted. While it has been proven that experiments on animals has benefited humans in many ways, enough evidence should have been gathered from those experiments where animals are no longer needed. Cats, dogs, sheep, lambs, pigs, mice, and monkeys are just a few of the animals that...
Words: 783 - Pages: 4
...Instructor’s Name Course Date Some Enemies of Science & The Pain of Animals Argumentative Fronts Introduction Throughout the path of evolution, both the human species and animals have progressed; ironically, humans have as well taken form from ancient animals. The evolution of our mind and body have divorced us on the supposed hierarchy chain. Human beings who happened to be hunters akin to Paleolithic animals have presently grasped the dominant responsibility on earth. Inevitably, there are hindrances, for example, pollution and diseases that we cannot beat at the present moment; colds and diseases being the single killer of nearly a quarter of the entire life on earth. In fact, for years on end, animals have been by used by scientists to...
Words: 1282 - Pages: 6
...American University of Beirut Truthful Utilitarianism Pamela Dagher English 203 Professor Kathryn Lincoln November 19, 2015 | | Through the years, a massive majority of animals were forced to live and perish in circumstances most of us would believe are morally unacceptable. During 2001, almost 17 billion animals in Western countries were raised and slaughtered to feed populations. An additional 100 million animals were killed in laboratories for research purposes, while another 30 million were killed for their fur. Sadly, this insane number of killed animals has been justified by several theories and beliefs that animals, for being nonhuman, are not worthy of any important moral consideration (Lin). Numerous reasonable ethical theories approve that this belief is mistaken, and Utilitarianism is the most important one of them. Animal abuse is the cause of a larger problematic which is the misinterpretation of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory and a lifestyle that says: “Act in such a way as to maximize the expected satisfaction of interests in the world, equally considered” (Mill). This rule is the application of the logical following ideology,“The Principle of Equal Consideration of Interests.” This ideology assumes that we should keep in mind which actions we would choose if we...
Words: 1578 - Pages: 7
...Why do we use animals to be tested on? Is it ethical or unethical? Many animals are used every year to test on human products, medications, and possible cures for diseases. These animals range from anywhere from rats to dogs and cats. Some tests are to help other animals as well, but are these test necessary and do we benefit from them? In the Journal essay I will discuss the benefits of animal testing and I will also discuss the downside of animal testing. When animals are used for testing cures and medicines, it helps us know if it is safe for humans to use them. The ethical side of animal testing is that it is good for us humans, because it helps us with answers and experiments. Researchers think that animals can feel no pain because they do not have a conscious. In pence’s book it says, “Animals are like fleshy machines: their eyes reflected no soul, and no pain lay behind their external “pain behavior”. So why do people get all worked up over animal testing if animals do not feel pain like us humans do? Animals have no pain or conscious, therefore they are tested on so humans do not have to suffer the pain from experiments. If we kill animals for food, why can we not use them for beneficial experiments as well? Animals are produced all the time for our food sources, and they have to be killed to become our food. If people think animals suffer from testing, they have to suffer in being raised for our food as well. If we allow animals to be produced and slaughtered for...
Words: 997 - Pages: 4
...Should Animals be used for Scientific Research? Kari Lundquist Composition II Susan Cochran February 11th, 2012 Abstract Animal research is needed for many uses for our scientists. Should animals be used for scientific research? We do need to make sure that their rights are accepted, that they are not in pain for the experiment, and that they are cared for prior and after the research. There are many advantages to why animals should be used for scientific research. The evidence and their rights show that when animals are used for research they are cared for scientifically. While in the same time animals have their own way of showing when they are in pain during a research project. Animal research provides educational research for our scientists and for what is needed to be accomplished. With the knowledge that humans have in today’s century, if they know that the research will cause pain to the animals it should need further approvals in order to move forward with the research project. Keywords: animal rights, animal pain, animal care Should Animals be used for Scientific Research? Today scientific research is always needed for educational purposes such as how to eliminate/reduce killing diseases and to see if the tested research is worth the act of scientists to move forward. Many people agree that using animals to do such research is beneficial to humans and non-humans. The evidence shows that when animals are used for research they are cared for...
Words: 2349 - Pages: 10
...Reasoning Instructor Galen Johnson June 23, 2014 \ Animals: Deserving of Utilitarianism? 1 Utilitarianism is best defined as given a choice between two acts, the one that creates greater happiness for the greatest number of people should be chosen. This should be applied to non-human beings as well. Animals are essential in our everyday lives. They provide companionship, nourishment for our bodies and can provide amazement to our eyes when seen in their natural habitat. They are important in human life. They deserve respect. We as the superior being should make decisions for non-humans based on the utilitarianism approach creating greater happiness or good for the greater numbers. Our decisions based on this approach when making choices where non-humans are concerned will be a beneficial choice for both humans and animals. So what do humans and animals have in common? René Descartes, for instance, regarded animals as simply “physical bodies that lacked minds or souls; thus, animals were similar to organic machines.” (Mosser, 2013) This type of thought is also coincides with Western and Christian thinking. That is, all is ranked from highest to lowest. God and Angels are the highest with humans, animals and plants to follow in order. Present day this is conflicting...
Words: 1253 - Pages: 6
...Worldwide, 500 million animals are subjected to inhumane experiments in the name of scientific research (Linzey, 2013). Evidence to support the practise of vivisection is confronting and highly criticised. However, it is essential society apply careful consideration in regard to the positive ground-breaking outcomes of these experiments and the encouraging positive impacts they have on human life. Nonetheless, rationalization is warranted for inflicting unnecessary treatment to innocent animals who cannot represent themselves. Strong advocacy provided by animal protections and research scientist, both contribute valid arguments for and against the practise of vivisection. A central determinant to these claims is questioning morality, who...
Words: 1467 - Pages: 6
...Animals and Human culture Before the 19th century, the West viewed nonhumans as being outside the legal and moral community (Francione, 2008). In this respect, how they were treated or used raised no legal or moral concern. The Western community could use nonhumans for whatever purpose they felt like, inflicting suffering and pain to whatever magnitude they wanted and no obligation owed to them would be deemed as being violated. In other words nonhumans were not distinguished from other inanimate objects and as such had no legal or moral obligations (Nikki, 2012). There are those acts that from the surface appeared as obligation towards other animals, for instance an obligation not to injure a donkey or horse that belonged to the neighbor, in actual sense we owed the obligation not to the animal but to our neighbors. Issues of moral became a concern only to the limited scope when humans who were cruel or known to subject the nonhumans to suffering were generally thought to be capable of maltreating humans. Just like the above, the obligation related to the animal in question was actually owed to the other human beings. Nonhumans were viewed as having little moral significance. This essay will focus on Jane Goodall assertion that ‘Who are we to say that the suffering of human being is more terrible than the suffering of nonhuman being, or that it matters more’? (1990). Some scholars believe that human being suffer more as compared to the nonhuman beings and they...
Words: 2475 - Pages: 10
...eyes dim, and the pool of blood spreads beneath her, the one question that echoes the strongest is simply…”Why?” As horrific a picture as the above might paint, such a scenario cruelly plays out in slaughterhouses around the world. Instances of animal cruelty and inhumane treatment are commonplace, yet society for the most part has turned a blind-eye to these misdeeds. Seemingly a dichotomy exists, whereby livestock and animals raised for human consumption (Hereinafter “food animals”) are allowed to be treated in ways that would be unthinkable for family pets and other creatures. By examining the morality and misconceptions behind this mindset, the financial realities of the industry, and the inherent health concerns associated with these activities, it will become evident that food animals clearly deserve to be treated more humanely. As hopefully the preceding paragraph has highlighted, most individuals would consider it deplorable for a beloved family pet to be treated in the aforementioned manner. Why then has society seemingly deemed it acceptable for farm animals to be handled as such? The most oft-argued rationalization for this mistreatment rests with the notion that these animals are basic creatures that simply do not feel pain...
Words: 1565 - Pages: 7
...Animal testing is the use of non-human animals for experimentation. There are studies that show that it is estimated that between 100 – 150 million vertebrate animals, including mice, rats, birds, fish, rabbits, guinea pigs, farm animals, dogs, cats and non-human primates, are used in animal testing worldwide. This large number does not even include the millions of vertebrates in the United States that are excluded from the Animal Welfare and thus not required to be reported. Animals are tested for the safety, and efficacy, of products to humans. In fact, both the EPA and the FDA use animal testing for the marketing of industrial chemicals, vaccines and medication. This is unethical for many reasons, most animals have a biology that is different from humans, so most animals make unreliable test subjects. Also, there are better testing ways that end with knowing how the human body will react....
Words: 1322 - Pages: 6
...“He who is cruel to animals becomes hard also in his dealings with men. We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals.” ― Immanuel Kant. Likewise, we can judge the amount of justice animals get in animal testing. While some believe animals should be tested on because it is necessary, most test on animals are not necessary, fail often, and are inhumane. Tests on animals are not necessary and are incorrect. First of all, most experiments are flawed; 87% of animal tests fail, causing animal lives to be sacrificed for nothing, according to procon.org. This means that people are being inconsiderate about wasted animals subjects. In the same fashion, 94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials anyways. To add, there are many alternatives to animal testing, and new technology that does not require animal subjects. WIth all these failed tests, animals are dying for...
Words: 519 - Pages: 3
...September 2015 Animal Rights “What is man without the beast? If the beast was gone, man would die from great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beast soon happens to the man” (Chief Seattle) Many things have been done to protect animals, but there are more significant things to be done to make sure they do not become extinct and give them their rights. Animals are just like humans in many ways. They have nerves so when they are being tested on they can feel the pain that is being inflicted on them. Many people consider their pet as their child, so what child would want that kind of pain inflicted on them? Finally, in different parts of the world, people still hunt animals. It is no longer a way to get food like it used to be. Now it is just for pure sport or fun. Should animals have to be hunted down and torn apart while still alive? Dogs, cattle, sheep, monkeys and other small animals are mainly the ones being experimented on. They are tested on numerous times throughout each year. Acute toxicity, skin irritation, psychology research are a few tests that the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals or PETA listed. Acute toxicity is a test where animals are force fed chemicals to find out the lethal dosage. Skin irritation tests are when chemicals are placed on the bare skin of animals, which the animal is restrained. Pointless test like the effects of shocking and drug abuse are known as psychology research test. Animals endure a lot of pain and suffering...
Words: 1071 - Pages: 5
...his article presents the review of James Rachels on the basic argument for vegetarianism by Peter Singer. The author develops the Singer’s idea that causing pain is not justified unless there is a sufficiently good reason for it (Rachels 72). Such approach is applicable to vegetarianism and explains why killing animals cannot be justified. Rachel accepts the essence of this idea and states that people should refuse to be the consumers of meat produced on farms and slaughterhouses. The author supports his stance with the point that eating meat for pleasure is not a convincing argument against vegetarianism. Neither is the need to provide the body with certain nutrients, which can be easily substituted with vegetable food. On the other hand,...
Words: 696 - Pages: 3
...Is cruelty to animals the only way? Animal cruelty is unacceptable, unfair, and needs to be stopped right away. It has increased in the past thousands of years and many groups like ”Animal Welfare Advocates” have been working hard to end brutal and suffering experiments. Animal testing is cruel, unfair and animals are just as important as any other life on this earth so people should protect them, they can find alternative ways to test products, and it is not always the same reaction between animals and humans. Animals can still feel pain and stress from being in cages, no matter how careful the researchers are (Watson 39). Some scientists do not use pain medicines or shots to help calm the animals. Since animals being in cages is extremely harmful and...
Words: 893 - Pages: 4
