Analysis Of Tom Regan's Animal Rights Human Wrongs

1052 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Tom Regan “The Radical Egalitarian Case for Animal Rights” summary

In Tom Regan’s article “Animal Rights, Human Wrongs,” he explores three different philosophical “accounts” and talks about their view and stances on animal rights and the treatment of animals. The first account that Regan looks at is the Kantian account, which is that humans have obligations to treat animals right only because if humans treated animals poorly it would lead to humans treating one another poorly. Regan says this account to be amiss because it makes us assume that animal interests do not matter and that we are not concerned with the poor treatment of the animal, yet instead we are concerned with the effect the action will have on humans in the future. The second account that Regan analyzes is the cruelty account, which revolves …show more content…

Regan talks about how some animals are being killed and beaten, but he does not expand past describing a few animal cruelty situations. By humans controlling the lives of many animals in this world, I think humans violate animal’s moral rights and also their inherent value because they cannot live a life that is better or worse for themselves. This is true for the reason that many humans see animals merely as a mean, which means that they do not care for the life of an animal and therefore do not treat them with any value compared to the way they treat humans. Nevertheless, I agree with Tom Regan’s plan to bring light to the conversation of animal rights by acting today and speaking for the animals because they cannot speak for themselves and without humans speaking for them, rights for animals will not ever happen. Moreover, I agree with many of the points that Tom Regan made in his article “Animal Rights, Human Wrongs,” but I conclude for his argument about animal’s rights to be strong all around, he would need to make sure to broaden the variety of animals that he is talking about being restrained and killed by humans. In conclusion, I believe that if one animal has rights, then EVERY animal should have rights. If Regan was to talk more about the life of controlled animals, he would really be able to show that humans are taking away the basic rights that animals should have, uniform to

Show More
Related

  • The Case for Animal Rights

    850 Words  | 2 Pages

    In conclusion, I agree with Tom Regan’s perspective of the rights view, as it explores the concept of equality, and the concept of rightful treatment of animals and humans. If a being is capable of living, and experiencing life, then they are more than likely capable of feeling pleasure and pain, except in a few instances. If humans are still treated in a respectable and right way even if some cannot vote, or think for themselves, then it is only fair that animals who also lack in some of these abilities be treated as equals. As Regan puts it, “pain is pain, wherever it occurs” (1989).

    Read More

  • The Ethics of Animal Use in Biomedical Research

    1849 Words  | 4 Pages

    Regan, Tom. “The Case for Animal Rights.” In Animal Rights and Human Obligations, 2 ed.. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989.

    Read More

  • Barton Hinkle's Do Animals Have Rights?

    1018 Words  | 3 Pages

    Society has placed humans to be the highest life form because of their ability to think and reason and give consent. On these grounds it has allowed society to become numb to any injustice done to animals in any way. This essay will argue whether the subjugation of minority women is linked to the way society views and treats animals by defining current animal rights, the Women’s rights Movement and the process by which the minority is seen as an animal.

    Read More

  • Exploring the Ethics of Modern Day Hunting

    1696 Words  | 4 Pages

    Regan, Tom. “The Case for Animal Rights.” In Defense of Animals. Ed. Peter Singer. New York:

    Read More

  • Animals Rights and Religion Analysis

    1223 Words  | 3 Pages

    Regan begins the essay by stating that " Not a few of people regard the animal rights position as extreme, calling, as it does, for the abolition of certain well-entrenched social practices rather than for their “humane” reform " ( Regan 619 ) . The writer also compares animal rights with humans based on extreme moral positions, such as rape, child pornography and racial discrimination, claiming that “. . . when an injustice is absolute, as is true of each of the example just cited, then one must oppose it absolute. It is not reformed, more humane child pornography than an enlightened ethic calls for: it is abolition that is required “(Regan 620). The writing is totally against hunting animals for sport, dressing in animal skins, and breeding of animals for slaughter. In his view any animal sacrifice is no different from a crime perpetuated a human being. Sacrifice any animal should stimulate the same emotional reaction that a crime a human being. This belief is considered by many as a vision "extremist” of animal rights and generally not widely accepted.

    Read More

  • Comparison of Animal Rights Texts

    774 Words  | 2 Pages

    of a dog, which appears to be crying. The size of the text is varied

    Read More

  • Peter Singer, And Tom Regan, Peter Singer And Aldo Leopold

    1133 Words  | 3 Pages

    As an advocate of animal rights, Tom Regan presents us with the idea that animals deserve to be treated with equal respect to humans. Commonly, we view our household pets and select exotic animals in different regard as oppose to the animals we perceive as merely a food source which, is a notion that animal rights activists

    Read More

  • Ethics and Morality in Vegetarianism

    1942 Words  | 4 Pages

    Regan T. The Struggle for Animal Rights. International Society for Animal Rights. Inc. darks Summit, PA. 1987.

    Read More

  • Carl Cohen's Do Animals Have Rights?

    722 Words  | 2 Pages

    My views closely relate to those of what Cohen says because we have no right to intervene with the animal world or project our view of morality onto them, especially when it leads to a discrimination of rights. However this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t protect animals or care for them. We do these things for animals not based on their rights or our obligations, but because they feel just like we do.

    Read More

  • Evaluation of Frosty's Story

    668 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this article Robison makes her point that animal cruelty is wrong and that people should be more aware of it. Although she failed to apply reliable sources in her article, her main points clearly show her strong focus on the value of animals. All caring people must surely agree that protecting animal life is a noble endeavor.

    Read More

  • Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach?

    1030 Words  | 3 Pages

    The article mainly focuses on this issue, not mentioning the aspects of animal rights. The authors argue their points well but can have counter-arguments against some

    Read More

  • Eating Meat Is Inhumane Case Study

    818 Words  | 2 Pages

    However, the current system does not treat animals as sentient-being but rather seen as a property which does not feel anything and have no right for respectful treatment. In addition, it should be addressed that guaranteeing animal right do not mean that they should be treated like humans but they should be given consideration like humans. Animals deserve to choose how they live and have right to not put in cage and killed by

    Read More

  • Argument for Stopping Animal Abuse

    2126 Words  | 5 Pages

    Tom Regan, “The Case for Animal Rights,” in In Defense of Animals, ed. Peter Singer (Oxford:

    Read More

  • Animal Research and Testing, Is it Ethical?

    2169 Words  | 5 Pages

    Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992. Call Number: HV4711.A5751992. Morris, Richard Knowles, and Michael W. Fox, eds. On the Fifth Day, Animal Rights. and Human Ethics.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Animal Agriculture

    1335 Words  | 3 Pages

    From a Right’s theory perspective, animal rights activists argue that “everything that occurs in animal agriculture harms animals or their interests,” (CAST, 2005, p. 5). Animal rights groups believe that animal agriculture should cease to exist since there is no way to avoid harming animals in the process. Another way to look at this ethical dilemma, is to consider the utilitarian theory. The utilitarian theory perspective would demand that “we attempt to achieve a balance of humans’ and animals’ benefits and harms,” (CAST, 2005, p. 5). By attempting to find balance in a way that benefits both humans and animals, it could help us work towards a solution that benefits all.

    Read More

More about Analysis Of Tom Regan's Animal Rights Human Wrongs

Open Document