Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Friedrich Nietzsche genooly of morals essay
Morals on animal research
Ethics of animal research essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Friedrich Nietzsche genooly of morals essay
Primate Virtues: A Cross-species Study of Morality
In his 1881 book, Daybreak, Friedrich Nietzsche wrote,
We do not regard the animals as moral beings. But do you suppose the animals regard us as moral beings? –An animal which could speak said, ‘Humanity is a prejudice of which we animals at least are free’.[1]
This passage expresses Nietzsche’s belief that animals do not judge human actions as morally good or bad. Only humans think in moral terms, Nietzsche believes –a prejudice of which “animals at least are free”. That is, animals do not believe in morality; and modern philosophers, as well as behavioral biologists, would have to agree. Nobody suspects their dog of trying to maximize utility, follow categorical imperatives, or do penance for his sins. Moral agency is uniquely human in this respect; only we maintain that our actions have some greater—moral—significance.
Ethical theories try to provide us with a coherent and rational account of precisely this moral aspect of human thought and action. But no matter how coherent and rational a given moral system may be, if it becomes too detached from our regular deliberations and actions, we do not consider it a correct account of our normal moral reasoning. But what exactly constitutes this “normal moral reasoning” that humans allegedly possess?
In this paper, I argue that human “moral reasoning” is actually a normal biological phenomenon that we share with the rest of the animal community, most noticeably with our closest primate relatives. I demonstrate this by using the standards provided by a normative moral theory to evaluate the actions of one of our animal relatives –Pan Troglodytes, or the African chimpanzee, illustrating the fact that these ...
... middle of paper ...
.... Cambridge,
Massachusetts, and London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
1986. (p. 378).
[7] Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. David Ross. Revised by J. L. Ackrill
and J.O. Urmson. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press. (p. 64).
[8] Ibid. p. 70.
[9] Ibid. p. 69.
[10] Ibid. p. 35.
[11] See Pears, David. “Aristotle’s Analysis of Courage”. Midwest Studies in
Philosophy 3: 273-285. 1978.
[12] See “Modern Moral Philosophy”, esp. p. 354.
[13] Mackie, John. “A Refutation of Morals”. In 20th Century Ethical Theory. Ed.
Steven M. Cahn and Joram G. Haber. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 1946.
[14] See Regal, Philip J. The Anatomy of Judgment. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press. 1990.
[15] “A Refutation of Morals”, p. 146.
[16] Ibid. p. 146.
Human morality could have clearly grown out of primate sociality. Though being morally aware may be a uniquely human trait, many species such as primates, dogs and ants, all known for living in a group, have been known to exhibit pre-moral sentiments. Concepts such as attachment, bonding, empathy, and
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46). Throughout the work, Nietzsche uses decidedly negative terms to describe “bad conscience,” calling it ugly (59), a sickness (60), or an illness (56); leading some to assume that he views “bad conscience” as a bad thing. However, Nietzsche hints at a different view when calling bad conscience a “sickness rather like pregnancy” (60). This analogy equates the pain and suffering of a pregnant woman to the suffering of man when his instincts are repressed. Therefore, just as the pain of pregnancy gives birth to something joyful, Nietzsche’s analogy implies that the negative state of bad conscience may also “give birth” to something positive. Nietzsche hopes for the birth of the “sovereign individual” – a man who is autonomous, not indebted to the morality of custom, and who has regained his free will. An examination of Nietzsche’s theory on the evolution of man’s bad conscience will reveal: even though bad conscience has caused man to turn against himself and has resulted in the stagnation of his will, Ni...
“Moral requirements are based on standards of rationality” (Johnson). Rational thinking allows us to determine right from wrong. This conscious decision leaves one with a choice of whether or not to act upon it. Understanding that a certain action, or lack thereof, will lead to negative consequences yet deliberately choosing such action is the bases of moral culpability. However, subjectivity of ethics and philosophies such as utilitarianism prove that moral culpability is entirely 2-dimensional and cannot account or explain the wide range of conflicting morals and ethics. An action can not be convicted as morally culpable because morals are entirely subjective and cannot be classified as right or wrong.
Being able to think and reason should be a primary requirement for deserving dignity and respect. With no ability to think or reason how could an animal even understand that it is being treated differently than other animals. Fukuyama argues this point as well, “Human reason…is pervaded by emotions, and its functioning is in fact facilitated by the latter.” Clearly moral choice cannot exist with out reason but it can also be seen in other feelings such as pride, anger, and shame. Humans are conscious of their actions, in spite of acting on instinct as other animals do. Animals do not contemplate any deeper meaning of life or justify complex mathematical equations or even think about the question ‘why’; Humans, however, do think about those things. It is our conscious thought that sets us apart from any other animal in the world. Yes animals have perception and problem solving abilities, but unlike they are not able to understand complex knowledge based concepts, although they can solve problems within their normal parameters. Every animal on the planet should have the ability to solve problems but only to a certain extent, the extent of survival. When a situation becomes a matter of life or death animals must to be able to learn to live. Survival of the fittest has ultimately
According to Dams as Aid author Ann Usher (1997), “a man-made dam is a cement wall that blocks the natural flow of a river” (p. 3).
A systemic crisis is a crisis in which the breadth of impact reaches many individuals within the system; for example, schools, businesses, entire communities, regions, or it may be worldwide. The individuals involved in a systemic crisis can become overwhelmed with the enormity of the situation and need physical and/or psychological assistance to regain control. Systemic crisis interventions require a combination of strategies working cooperatively together across multiple agencies to effectively address all potential needs of the victims. However, not all systemic crises are the same and require interventions that are specific to the systemic crisis category. The following paragraphs will give a brief description of a natural disaster
Filters are the means of controlling and directing the flow of seepage water through dams for hundreds of years. Filters are used to prevent movement of soil particles from or between various zones and foundations of embankment dams. Such movement, if not controlled, can result in the development of concentrated leaks that can lead to serious consequences and, in extreme cases, failure of an embankment dam. In fact, approximately 50% of all dam failures are attributed to excess seepage. These sort of failures are progressive in nature and begi...
Why is incest deplorable amongst humans, but not for dogs? What makes it acceptable for a man to kill a deer, but wrong if he kills another man? Why do these lines get drawn between humans and animals? David Hume has an answer to these questions. Though many philosophers, like Saint Augustine, argue that humans are morally different from animals because of their capability to reason, Hume states that it is passion and sentiment that determines morality. In his book, Treatise with Human Nature, Hume claims that vice and virtue stems from the pleasure or pain we, mankind, feel in response to an action not from the facts that we observe (Hume, 218). Hume uses logic to separate morality into a dichotomy of fact and value, making it clear that the only reasonable way to think of the ethics of morality is to understand that it is driven by passion, as opposed to reason (Angeles, 95). In this essay I will layout Hume's position on morality and defining ambiguous terms on the way. After Hume's argument is well established, I will then precede to illustrate why it is convincing and defend his thesis against some common objections.
There are hundreds of natural disasters that occur on the earth on a yearly basis. Some natural disasters are more severe than other natural disasters. disasters include floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tsunamis. These disasters cause great trauma, stress, major property damage and sometimes death. Natural disasters is any catastrophic event that is caused by nature or the natural processes of the earth. The severity of a disaster are measured in lives lost, economic loss, and the ability of the population to rebuild. The bigger, the population the disaster hits, the more repairs needed. In many cases, these major events are heartbreaking to watch, let alone to experience. (“Natural disasters,” n.d.)
Morals are the intrinsic rules contained within human beings, otherwise called the embodiment of reason (Aquinas) instilled through evolution and social conduct in the world around the possessor.(LAW VS MORALITY PG.231) It is important to note that these intrinsic rules are not created by man, but are found within as a result of internal factors. In agreement with Hart such an internal factor may be the instinct to survive, based on the truism that all humans want to survive. Further external factors such as the h...
Additionally, speciesists argue that human beings are the only creatures who are self-aware. They believe that due to this characteristic, they are able to think rationally while all other nonhuman animals cannot. Speciesists claim that this enables them to think and act morally, and so entitles them to a higher moral status. This argument, like many other speciesist arguments, fails when “the argument from marginal cases” is applied. The argument from marginal cases argues t...
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND BUREAU OF RECLAMATION. (1985) Hoover Dam. Washingto, D.C., pp. 56.
When a dam is built a reservoir collects behind it, which also collects rainwater. The reservoir allows us to control the amount of water that flows through the dam and lets us still have a steady flow of water, even during years with less rainfall. The dam itself has spillways to control the amount of water leaving the dam. One major problem with dams is the affect they have on migrating fish traveling up and down the rivers. Many dams have special fish ladders to allow the fish to pass through (Today, 2001).
For years, the matter of morality has been a widespread topic of discussion, debating whether it is a product of our chemical composition or our free will. Before I get started, I will provide you with what I believe morality exactly is. Ethics is a “code of conduct,” much like a University’s student handbook, but applied to the expected morality of a larger group or society. Morals are how individuals choose to interpret and follow such code. Just as a student may not always act in complete obedience with the student handbook, humans also deviate from their ethical codes of conduct. Therefore, morals are the set of a person’s specific values and opinions formed by their interpretation of their society’s code of ethics. With this version of the meaning of morality, I believe that individual free-will and the neurological hardwiring in which we are born with both significantly influence the development of our mature human morality due to a variety of factors including: human brain development, differences in our upbringing and education, which give rise to disparities in matters such as what is considered right or wrong, decision-making processes, and our ultimate behavioral choices, and lastly, because morality cannot exist if based solely on human nature, it must also involve our own self-determination. My position that morality is not the product of one side of the debate or the other, but rather arises through the integration of both components, allows for a complete demonstration of morality in its entirety. In this system, the ambiguities present in the one-sided arguments are removed, making it easy to link any individual’s action to their personal moral accountability.
In the end I would like to say that disasters are inevitable so the authorities should be prepare beforehand and when the disaster actually occurs the response should be fast and effective. There after the recovery from the loss occurred should be well planned and future planning should be done so that much better protection steps can prevent larger damage.