group project3 - Lam Duong Cory Isabelle Kevin Menear Roger...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Lam Duong, Cory Isabelle, Kevin Menear, Roger L. Swingle III Minds and Machines Group Project Group C For thousands of years, man and beast have lived side-by-side on this planet. As man progressed into modern times, we have been able to conquer and govern the world that we know. With this power comes great responsibility. As the ruling species, we must give rights to the other species that we come in contact with; we must be able to recognize the rights of animals. In making this difficult decision, we must recognize that, unlike men, all animals are not created equal. There are certain animals which should be given certain rights, while others should not. There are a few ways we can go about determining which animals have specific rights, one way is to determine if the being in question has the right to persist. There are specific guidelines for the determination of which animals will be recognized as having the right to persist, which we will have to go into more detail in order to figure out who has the right to persist . Another way to determine which animals have rights is whether or not the animal can be classified and described as a “person”. These “persons” have a specific group of rights which may not be applied to non-persons. We will call these rights the unique rights of persons. These may seem like immense ideas but, in order to make any sort of justification, we must start at the beginning. With this in mind, we must ask ourselves this: What kinds of creatures have rights? To start off we must know what the Interest Theory of Rights is and what it means. This theory states that rights are derived from interests, and are the desires of an agent for something. The theory points out that it is only moral for us to respect everyone/ everything’s interests and therefore we must recognize the se interest s to be the right s of the agent in question. However, these rights are limited because they cannot violate another agent’s interest s, or rights . For example, one cannot simply go around 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Lam Duong, Cory Isabelle, Kevin Menear, Roger L. Swingle III Minds and Machines Group Project Group C murdering people just because one desires it. This action would contradict the Interest Theory of Rights since in doing so the action would violate another agent’s interest to live. With that said, just about anything can be a candidate for rights, so long as the candidate possesses the interest that corresponds with the particular right. In other words an agent only possesses the rights that the agent is interested in. Furthermore, non- humans, especially animals have rights since some animal’s brains work in a similar fashion to human brains. For instance, when elephant mothers and human mothers give birth, a chemical called oxytocin is released. This chemical provokes feelings of love and protection for the new born. Just like a human, the animal mother now has an interest in loving and protecting their young, and thus it is now a right for them to do so. Therefore
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This essay was uploaded on 04/16/2008 for the course IHSS IHSS 1051 taught by Professor Vanorman during the Spring '08 term at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

Page1 / 8

group project3 - Lam Duong Cory Isabelle Kevin Menear Roger...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online