An essay on peter singer and animal ethics

Animal ethics is concerned with the status of animals, whereas environmental ethics concerns itself with the relationship to the environment. I will show the existence of animal ethics depends on the existence of environmental ethics. I will prove this by showing that such philosophers who have practiced animal ethics such as Singer, Regan, and Taylor are limited because they are individualistic.

An essay on peter singer and animal ethics

His principle of equal consideration of interests does not dictate equal treatment of all those with interests, since different interests warrant different treatment. All have an interest in avoiding pain, for instance, but relatively few have an interest in cultivating their abilities.

Not only does his principle justify different treatment for different interests, but it allows different treatment for the same interest when diminishing marginal utility is a factor.

The journey model is tolerant of some frustrated desire and explains why persons who have embarked on their journeys are not replaceable. Only a personal interest in continuing to live brings the journey model into play.

This model also explains the priority that Singer attaches to interests over trivial desires and pleasures. Ethical conduct is justified by reasons that go beyond prudence to "something bigger than the individual", addressing a larger audience. This universalising step, which Singer traces from Kant to Hare, [22] is crucial and sets him apart from those moral theorists, from Hobbes to David Gauthierwho tie morality to prudence.

Taking these into account, one must weigh them up and adopt the course of action that is most likely to maximise the interests of those affected; utilitarianism has been arrived at.

Singer regards Kantian universalisation as unjust to animals. Effective altruism and world poverty[ edit ] Main article: Effective altruism Singer at an effective altruism conference in Melbourne in While Singer has previously written at length about the moral imperative to reduce poverty and eliminate the suffering of nonhuman animals, particularly in the meat industryhe writes about how the effective altruism movement is doing these things more effectively in his book, The Most Good You Can Do.

He is a board member of Animal Charity Evaluators, a charity evaluator used by many members of the effective altruism community which recommends the most cost-effective animal advocacy charities and interventions.

TLYCS was founded after Singer released his eponymous bookin which he argues more generally in favour of giving to charities that help to end global poverty.

In particular, he expands upon some of the arguments made in his essay " Famine, Affluence, and Morality ", in which he posits that citizens of rich nations are morally obligated to give at least some of their disposable income to charities that help the global poor.

He supports this using the drowning child analogy, which states that most people would rescue a drowning child from a pond, even if it meant that their expensive clothes were ruined, so we clearly value a human life more than the value of our material possessions.

As a result, we should take a significant portion of the money that we spend on our possessions and instead donate it to charity. There are far more differences, for instance, between a great ape and an oyster, for example, than between a human and a great ape, and yet the former two are lumped together as "animals", whereas we are considered "human" in a way that supposedly differentiates us from all other "animals.

Ryder to describe the practice of privileging humans over other animals, and therefore argues in favour of the equal consideration of interests of all sentient beings. Singer describes himself as a flexible vegan. In a Guardian article he titled, "Fish: Singer states that she "has put together what may well be the first-ever systematic estimate of the size of the annual global capture of wild fish.

It is, she calculates, in the order of one trillon, although it could be as high as 2. Singer has defended some of the actions of the Animal Liberation Frontsuch as the stealing of footage from Dr.Dec 19,  · In his new book, “Ethics in the Real World: 82 Brief Essays on Things That Matter,” Mr.

Singer picks up the topics of animal rights and poverty amelioration and runs quite far with them. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals is a book by Australian philosopher Peter is widely considered within the animal liberation movement to be the founding philosophical statement of its ideas.

Singer himself rejected the use of the theoretical framework of rights when it comes to human and nonhuman Author: Peter Singer. Peter Singer is often described as the world's most influential philosopher. He is also one of its most controversial. The author of important books such as Animal Liberation, Practical Ethics, Rethinking Life and Death, and The Life You Can Save, he helped launch the animal rights and effective altruism movements and contributed to the development of bioethics.

In recent times, theorists such as Peter Singer 4 and Gaverick Matheny 5 have examined what follows from the inclusion of the interests of nonhuman animals implied by utilitarianism.

An essay on peter singer and animal ethics

For utilitarianism, the use of nonhuman animals can be acceptable only if the happiness their exploitation causes is greater than the harm it causes.

Peter Albert David Singer, AC (born 6 July ) is an Australian moral philosopher. He is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of specialises in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a Main interests: Applied ethics · Bioethics.

Moral philosopher and Princeton professor Peter Singer described what he called a “momentous revolution in thinking” regarding animal welfare during a talk in the Ames Courtroom at the Harvard.

Ethics, Applied | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy