The Debate of Animal Testing in Laboratories
Debating over the animal rights movement has raised questions and concerns for many years. Although animal research has been the cause of many medical breakthroughs, is it morally and ethically right to put animals in these kinds of situations? This is one of the underlying questions that must be solved before it is too late. There has already been too much violence and harm caused by the opposing views of this argument. Shouts of protests and riots are heard on the streets, labs and medical equipment are being burned and destroyed and innocent animals are left hanging in the wake. While animal rights organizations fight for more “kinder, gentler” ways to treat animals, animal research advocates strongly believe that animals unlock the key to curing and ailing diseases. Two sides to pro activists include both animal rights advocates and animal welfare advocates. “Animal rights means that animals are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, or experimentation. Animal welfare, on the other hand, permits these uses of animals as long as certain humane guidelines are enforced” (Frequently). Some people believe the concern for animals is a waste of time when there are so many humans in need. Pro activists, however, argue that humans and animals are equally important and both deserve attention. This is a problem that concerns everyone in the world. We, as humans, depend on animals for many things such as food and clothing, so where and when will this controversy end? There must be a compromise, but it is up to us to find the solution to this overwhelming problem.
Animal rights activists contribute to the first position on this issue. They believe that animals sho...
... middle of paper ...
...r the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” It is therefore concluded, from this scripture and research, that animal testing is permissible as long as it is in our best interest and no additional harm is done. Abraham Lincoln summarized my point of view when he said, “I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being” (Practical Issues). There will hopefully come a day when all the controversy can be set aside and people come together for the sake of the animals. However, that is going to take much effort by both sides and cannot be solved in one day or by one alternative. It is going to take time, effort, and most of all compassion. It is our duty as humans to unite and care for all creatures that God created. Only on that day will animals be truly safe and content.
Loeb, Jerod M. “Human vs. Animal Rights: In Defense of Animal Research.” Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. Gilford: Dushkin Publishing Group, 2011
Tuttle, B. (2013, March 26). Southwest Airlines: We're Not Really About Cheap Flights Anymore . Retrieved from TIME Magazine : http://business.time.com/2013/03/26/southwest-airlines-were-not-really-about-cheap-flights-anymore/
The Communist Party of China (CCP), in power since 1950, is not famous for its tolerance of those who do not agree with its ideology and opinion. People must adhere to the Party’s legislation, and face consequences (the severity of which is debated) if they resist or rebel. One way the CCP controls members is through religion. Although the government encourages almost cult-like devotion to the Party, it allows its constituents to participate in certain major international religions. One religion that is illegal to participate in under Chinese law is the spiritual practice of Falun Gong. A new movement, the Falun Gong grew quickly in China and globally, and was officially banned in 1999. The CCP claims the Falun Gong is evil, and should be destroyed humanely to save China. However, the Falun Gong is peaceful, and the Chinese government is the institution that tortures, jails, and abuses its citizens if they are practitioners of the religion. The international response calls for the halting of these immoral actions, but China still claims that it is destroying an evil institution. The simple fact China denies its members freedom of religion violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which China has signed, but the violence against its people if they adhere to Falun Gong beliefs is a gross abuse of its power. Although China bans many religions, there is special emphasis on the Falun Gong, and many wonder why. One highly possible reason is that the growth, international reach, and popularity of the Falun Gong threatens the universal power the CCP holds in China, weakening the government, and therefore leading to the destruction of the threat: the Falun Gong.
Descartes then states that he wishes to extend his knowledge through knowledge in his own self. He judges things that he once knew as fact to possibly now be doubtful and uncertain and that all his prior knowledge could have just been a work from a deceitful God. If then he wishes to learn from within himself and a deceitful God does in fact exist how can he affirm any knowledge within himself or even any knowledge he has affirmed through his meditations? If ideas that he once had now seemed uncertain then does that not mean all he knows can just be a work of a deceitful God, if of course a God does exist.
A major strength of his was the idea of objective reality. He believes that it is useless to claim the existence of one thing until we are positive as to how that claim can be defended as a true belief. He shows how we are able to prove our beliefs about existence by limiting what we believe is indeed certain. He goes about doing this through three main points. First, that “in order to have knowledge, we need to be able to tell the difference between a hallucination and a perception.” Secondly, “it is impossible to distinguish between an hallucination and a normal perception.” And lastly, “we do not know whether any of our perceptual beliefs are true.” Through his ideas presented in Meditation I, he pleads that our look on the world cannot provide an insured basis on which all other knowledge can be based. This makes us think about whether everything that we see to be obvious are actually inaccurate. In order for us to prove something's existence, Descartes recommends that we use a method that traces what we know back to a definite foundation of unquestionable
Descartes then considers whether it is through his imagination that he knows the wax, rather than through his senses, but finds this lacking as well. First, let us delineate what Descartes means by “imagination.” Earlier in the Meditations, Descartes describes imagination as a mental simulation—of a sensory nature—of a corporeal entity. That is to say, when we imagine something we contemplate a mental image of some object. This mental object, an individual instance of imagining, is therefore precise, in the sense that the object is imagined as possessing certain properties.
Claiming that the different senses have perceived in him the way once was before it came in contact with the heat, but still remains the same, although being perceived in a different way, but with the same senses as before except for it being liquid after the heat but remains with the same other traits he mentioned. Therefore, this is how he establishes his claim of the Aristotelian intellect and Cogito inference by rejecting everything and doubting its existence and separating the nature of the body and mind as the body being a non-extended thinking thing such as the senses, and the mind being a thinking thing that can extend. Descartes states that he perceives the wax through the mind alone and says that perception is not an imagination, touching or seeing but it is an inspection of the mind
...a single claim that cannot be uncontestably proven true. Through this he proves his existence, God’s existence, and how he is certain of this. His though provoking wax experiment demonstrated how one’s senses can be deceived, and how one’s intellect can combine with one’s senses and imagination in order to provide a firm perception. This is related to Gestalt psychology, where the parts of the mind form the whole, and objects are perceived in their entirety before perception of their individual parts. Descartes’ works will continue to be the basis for modern Western philosophy, and influence how one can separate beliefs and opinions from the truth.
Therefore, in Meditation two in Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes proves to show the distinction between the mind and that of the body. Descartes knows without a doubt that he is a thinking thing who has certain powers such as affirming, denying, sensing, imagining etc. The example that he provided with the piece of wax showed how we could misjudge and come to error when perceiving a thing. Descartes is able to prove that he exists in the same way that he judged the existence of the wax and how he saw it. Most importantly, Descartes comes to the conclusion that the intellect of the mind is what helps distinct and perceive something, rather than other factors.
The question now is how are we to doubt everything? Descartes claims that we are fooled by our minds, meaning we do not really know what is false or not. For instance, one a hot day you look at a the ground at a distance and think you see water, but in reality the heat rising from the ground which from a certain angle looks like water but then when you get closer you see the ground not water. In addition, Descartes que...
Jazz first started in the early twentieth century, during that time, live music was still the main for of entertainment. Historians believe that the birthplace of Jazz music win in New Orleans, Louisiana. It started in New Orleans because there was all kinds of music there. The music that was especially prominent there was Ragtime, from Missouri, and The Blues, from Mississippi (Tyle, np).
Throughout history, beginning as early as 500 BC, animals have been used to test products that will later be utilized by humans (“Animal Testing” 4), what isn’t publicly discussed is the way it will leave the animals after the process is done. Many innocent rabbits, monkeys, mice, and even popular pets such as dogs are harmed during the testing application of cosmetics, medicine, perfumes, and many other consumer products (Donaldson 2). Nevertheless, there are many people whom support the scandal because "it is a legal requirement to carry out animal testing to ensure they are safe and effective” for human benefit (Drayson). The overall question here is should it even be an authorized form of experimentation in the United States, or anywhere else? The fact of the matter is that there are alternatives to remove animals out of the equation for good (“Alternatives” 1). They are cheaper, and less invasive than the maltreatment of the 26 million innocent animals that are subjected to the heartlessness of testing each year (“Animal Testing” 4). All in all, due to the harsh effects of animal testing, it should be treated as animal cruelty in today’s society.
I find the particular structure of the argument rather problematic because Descartes built this knowledge of the human mind with an apparent belief that the body of wax already exists. Since he has not established the existence of matter, there would not be any wax for the discussion. He has no right to determine the precise identity of the mind, provided that any concept defined in relation to the matter should be considered uncertain at this time. Descartes also indicates that the nature of the wax can be understood only by our imagination. When the wax is melted, evaporated or boiled, there are many more changes in...
Peter Singer, an author and philosophy professor, “argues that because animals have nervous systems and can suffer just as much as humans can, it is wrong for humans to use animals for research, food, or clothing” (Singer 17). Do animals have any rights? Is animal experimentation ethical? These are questions many struggle with day in and day out in the ongoing battle surrounding the controversial topic of animal research and testing, known as vivisection. Throughout centuries, medical research has been conducted on animals.
Every year, millions of animals experience painful, suffering and death due to results of scientific research as the effects of drugs, medical procedures, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. Basically, animal experimentation has played a dominant role in leading with new findings and human advantages. Animal research has had a main function in many scientific and medical advances in the past decade and is helping in the understanding of several diseases. While most people believe than animal testing is necessary, others are worried about the excessive suffering of this innocent’s creatures. The balance between the rights of animals and their use in medical research is a delicate issue with huge societal assumptions. Nowadays people are trying to understand and take in consideration these social implications based in animals rights. Even though, many people tend to disregard animals that have suffered permanent damage during experimentation time. Many people try to misunderstand the nature of life that animals just have, and are unable to consider the actual laboratory procedures and techniques that these creatures tend to be submitted. Animal experimentation must be excluded because it is an inhumane way of treat animals, it is unethical, and exist safer ways to test products without painful test.