Animal testing as a result of the lack of human respect towards animals

This does not mean, however, that we are not required to consider how our actions will affect animals at all. Although I have a duty to refrain from destroying your property, that duty can be trumped if I must destroy the property in order to save a life.

I cannot destroy your car if I desire to do so because it is your property, and by harming it I will thereby harm you.

Not just intelligence: Why humans deserve to be treated better than animals

And in this respect mankind has suffered a fundamental debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it. These animals have nervous systems similar to ours, which respond physiologically like ours do when the animal is in circumstances in which we would feel pain.

Animals kill one another all the time.

Is Animal Testing Justified

It is a chronic illness affecting 3 million people in Britain, including one in eight children. It is only an argument to treat humans better than animals and to keep using animals for our benefit. These values, and others like them, are the highest values to us; they are what make our lives worth living.

References and Further Reading. Although I have a duty to refrain from destroying your property, that duty can be trumped if I must destroy the property in order to save a life. Speakers who contributed to the conference reviewed and contributed new knowledge regarding the cognitive and affective capabilities of animals, revealed through ethology, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and related disciplines.

It is useful and productive to test these animals with similar organ and never systems. One problem with this type of argument is that many humans themselves do not actually fulfill the criteria for belonging to the human moral community.

Ten years later, Oxford chemists Ernest Chain and Howard Florey were working on antibacterial substances. Other millions of animals are killed by automobiles Cats, dogs, raccoons, foxes, deer etc. In other words, if an individual has a right to something, we are not permitted to infringe on that right simply because doing so will have better overall results.

Rather, we also have a duty to refrain from being cruel to them. So, when it comes to ethical consideration, animals should not be put in a general category, but each species should be assigned its own value. Serious harm has been caused to animals including death.

Instead, each such being must be treated as an end in itself. This line of reasoning works for almost every property that has been thought to warrant our denying direct moral status to animals. If being rational or autonomous, or able to speak is what permits us to deny direct moral status to animals, then we can likewise deny that status to any human that is not rational or autonomous, able to speak, etc.

Measuring Progress 50 Years Later, which aims to spur ethical and scientific advancement. A failure to do so is nothing other than speciesism, or giving preference to the interests of our own species merely because of they are of our species.

Once again, however, few are willing to accept that conclusion. The following year two doctors, Peyton Rous and Joseph Turner at the Rockefeller Institute, New York showed that blood treated with citrate and glucose could be stored for as long as three weeks in rabbits and safely transfused back into the animals.

It was also endemic among farm animals. Naturally, a human life is respected more than an animal life. Animals denied rights for human-unlikeness are experimented on for human-likeness Charles R.

Thomas Aquinas argues that since only beings that are rational are capable of determining their actions, they are the only beings towards which we should extend concern "for their own sakes" Regan and Singer, Rather than simply relying on the fact that it is "natural" for rational and autonomous beings to use non-rational beings as they see fit, Kant instead provides an argument for the relevance of rationality and autonomy.

Second, there may be an argument for vegetarianism that does not rely on considerations of the welfare of animals at all. Yet, there are no laws to ban the use of animals in circuses. Humans, Experimental animals like mice, apes etc.

In other words, we would be justified in becoming, not racists, but sophisticated inegalitarians. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: In support of premise 1many argue that pain and pleasure are directly morally relevant, and that there is no reason to discount completely the pleasure or pain of any being.

There are adequate alternatives to animal experimentation The main reason why the alternatives to animal testing are not being used is that they are impractical or too costly.

Medical Benefits

Such properties as being human or having human DNA do not admit of degrees, but, as already mentioned, these properties do not seem to be capable of supporting such a moral status.

The Human Use of Animals: What is clear is that many of the emotions that we value as human are not present in animals. George Bernard Shaw - "Vivisection is a social evil because if it advances human knowledge, it does so at the expense of human character.The other is passive abuse includes lack of care or negligence towards pets.

This happens as a result of inaction. Generally, it has been observed that such a situation arises when the pet owner is not aware of or does not bother to take proper care of the pet's needs for food, shelter, medical attention etc.

“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of. Cruelty of Animal Testing- Rabbits immobilized in wooden stocks with ulcers in their eyes; baby seals being clubbed over the head, and the infamous shock treatment.

Broach the subject with an individual and odds are that they have witnessed footage of one or all of the aforementioned practi.

Is Animal Testing Justified

Animal nature has analogies to human nature, and by doing our duties to animals in respect of manifestations of human nature, we indirectly do our duty to humanity.

We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals. Animal Testing as a Result of the Lack of Human Respect towards Animals PAGES 7. WORDS 2, View Full Essay. More essays like this: animal testing, cruelty to animals, animal testing effects. Not sure what I'd do without @Kibin - Alfredo Alvarez, student @ Miami University.

Exactly what I needed. Animal-based research is widely used in agriculture and 'basic' scientific research in relation to which the argument 'animal research saves (human) lives' does not apply.

Animals and Ethics

Find out more about the types of research involving animals.

Animal testing as a result of the lack of human respect towards animals
Rated 3/5 based on 85 review