Examination and evaluation of Peter Singer's perspective on the moral status of animals

Authors

1 بنیاد، بلوار شهید کریمی، کریمی ۱۵، کوچه ۹ پلاک ۴۰

2 University of Qom

10.22081/jare.2024.68685.1898

Abstract

The examination and clarification of the "moral status of animals" is one of the important and challenging topics in applied ethics, given its direct impact on human life and the environment. The concept of "moral status" has been presented with various criteria and standards, and some philosophers have emphasized that possessing rationality, general understanding, awareness, and particularly self-awareness are prerequisites for having "moral status," thus assigning inherent value and "moral status" exclusively to humans. In contrast to this perspective, Peter Singer, a contemporary utilitarian philosopher, criticizes the anthropocentric view and challenges traditional views on the criterion of moral status, introducing "pain and suffering" as a valid and precise criterion for "moral status" through an innovative and critical approach. This article briefly mentions the main perspectives on "moral status," presents Peter Singer's new and controversial criterion regarding the moral status of animals, and evaluates and critiques his assumptions and claims in this regard. It is evident that accepting Singer's proposed criterion and acknowledging the "moral status of animals" leads to a reconsideration of the relationship between humans and animals, refraining from instrumentalism, and striving to end the cycle of unnecessary suffering and cruelty towards animals, which becomes an ethical obligation.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1.  References

    1. Holy Quran.
    2. Nahj al-Balagha.
    3. Animal Testing Facts and Statistics/ PETA (n.d). Retrieved January 18, 2024, from https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimentation-factsheets/animal-experiments-overview/
    4. Becker, Lawrence C. and Charlotte B. Becker (2001). Collection of Essays on Moral Philosophy (taken from Lawrence Becker's encyclopedia). a group of translators. Qom: Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute.
    5. Goralnik, L. & Nelson, M. P. (2012). In R. Chadwick (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics (Second Edition) (pp. 145–155). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-373932-2.00349-5
    6. Hursthouse, R. (2013). Moral Status. In H. LaFollette (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Ethics (Vol. 3, pp. 3422–3432). Wiley.
    7. Javadi, Mohsen (2008). “Anthropocentricity in environmental ethics with an emphasis on Islamic attitude”. Essays and Reviews Quarterly. Winter, Vol. 100, p. 47-66.
    8. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/kant-moral/
    9. Molgan, Tim (2021). An introduction to the understanding of Bentham's utilitarianism, Mill, Sedgwick. Translated by Behnam Khodapanah. Qom: Taha Book.
    10. Poeman, Louis P. (2003). Environmental Ethics. translated by Mostafa Malekian and others. Tehran: Tawse'eh.
    11. Regan, Tom (2017). Animal Rights, Human Errors: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. translated by Behnam Khodapanah. Tehran: Kargadan.
    12. Singer, P. (2011). Practical ethics (3rd ed). Cambridge University Press.
    13. Singer, Peter (2016). Animal Freedom. translated by Behnam Khodapanah. Tehran: Phoenix.
    14. Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2023). Consequentialism. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/consequentialism/
    15. Sleight, M. (2024, January 10). Animal abuse facts and statistics 2024. USA TODAY Blueprint. https://www.usatoday.com/money/blueprint/pet-insurance/animal-abuse-statistics/
    16. Stone, K. (2019, February 22). The Fur Trade. Humane Society International. https://www.hsi.org/news-resources/fur-trade/
    17. Timofeeva, Aksana (2019). History of Animals. translated by Qasim Momeni. Tehran: Daman.
    18. Torres, Bob (2016). Political Economy of Animal Rights. translated by Golnaz Malek. Tehran: Markaz.
    19. Wilson, S. D. (2024). Animals and Ethics. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/animals-and-ethics/

     

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 02 March 2024
  • Revise Date: 29 April 2024
  • Accept Date: 29 April 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics