Lecture 18 - pro animal experiments

Lecture 18 - pro animal experiments - E. For Singer, even...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Pro-Animal Experimentation March 10, 2008; Page 1 Animal Experimentation Carl Cohen’s “The Case for the Use of Animals in Biomedical Research” I. Cohen’s Argument A. One main line of through for why nonhuman animal experimentation is permissible 1. Speciesist and proud! a) We are frankly superior, more vulnerable beings. Why? Because of our abilities. Thus, our interests are more important; and when our interests in not suffering comes into conflict with their interest in not suffering, their interests take a back seat B. For Cohen, the presumption is that animal experimentation is permissible. The burden of proof, then, is on those who think otherwise 1. Singer’s proof is not compelling C. For Cohen, the differences in the moral and intellectual capacities between human and nonhuman animals is enormous/tremendous 1. It goes beyond degree; we have abilities that animals lack altogether D. The differences between us and animals is far greater than the possible differences between the races and sexes in Singer’s hypothetical world
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: E. For Singer, even if there was a differences in the intellectual and moral capacities amongst different people groups (ie: men on average are less intelligent than women), that wouldnt meant that one would be justified in using men to further their own interests F. Humans are more intelligent than animals, but why think this warrants animals being used for the needs and interests of humans? G. Cohen says, but come on, theres no comparison between a rat and a human on the one hand, and a women who is smarter than another man on the other 1. For example, animals don't have the ability to conjure up a life plan of their own liking, and make decisions for themselves on how to best achieve this life plan. Thus are we exploiting them? H. Thus, while we do have a prima facie obligation to keep from harming animals. This obligation is not as strong as the obligation we have to other humans to keep each other from suffering....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/09/2008 for the course PHIL 7 taught by Professor Blair during the Winter '08 term at UCSB.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online