Lecture 6

Question 1

the main question in animal ethics is what

Answer 1

do animals have a moral status

Question 2

to answer the question, we must do what

Answer 2

show that animals possess the relevant property

Question 3

what is relevant property

Answer 3

To bentham and mill— sentience (capacity to feel pleasure and pain
the table has no moral status because it cannot feel pleasure and pain

Question 4

does a table have moral ethics? What does this mean

Answer 4

Table has no moral ethics— what does this mean? You cannot wrong the table by any actions
Human beings; are suceptible to moral consideration

Question 5

what are the 2 relevant properties

Answer 5

sentience and reason

Question 6

what is sentience

Answer 6

capacity to feel pleasure and pain

Question 7

what do bentham and mill believe

Answer 7

animals have moral status because they are sentient beings

Question 8

what does singer believe

Answer 8

is in accordance with bentham and mill

Question 9

what does kant believe

Answer 9

animals do to have a moral status because they are not rational beings

Question 10

what are other possible properties

Answer 10

having a soul
having the capacity for human like relationships
being human (aka having human DNA)
being able to enter into social contract

Question 11

what is singers

Answer 11

consequentialist

Question 12

what does singer consider to be “good”

Answer 12

this means that for him, the good is the satisfaction of your interest (if you have an interest in avoidng pain, and you avoid the pain, this is good)

Question 13

what is n interest (principle of equal consideration of interests)

Answer 13

An interest is undefined in the reading; so basically it is undefinable. We can give examples thogh; interest in avoidng pain, satisfying basic needs, developing friendships, to be free to develop ideas etc

Question 14

is an interest a preference

Answer 14

An interest is NOT a preference; a kid may not want to go to school but he still has an interest in going to school… a kid may have a preference to eat junk food but an interest in healthy food.
A preference is more subjective and an interest is more objective

Question 15

how do we know our interests

Answer 15

they vary according to out capacities and abilities

a gifted child may have different interest than a non-gifted child. They have different goals

Question 16

what is the fundamental capacity

Answer 16

the capacity for suffering

Fundamental capacity; to feel pleasure and pain. You must be able to feel this in order to have interests.
If we talk about plants, trees, the environment; these do not have an interest because they supposedly cannot feel pleasure and pain. SO you may think that this entails for environmental ethics; you could criticise him for his view and talk about the environment

Question 17

why sentience and not reason?

Answer 17

1. The problem of arbitrariness

2. The problem of marginal cases

Question 18

what is The problem of arbitrariness

Answer 18

Arbitrariness; singer talks about many capacity and says that the most basic is sentience, but we can talk about reason, intelligence and self awareness. The only one that is not arbitruary is sentience. The other properties are arbitrary, beyond sentience there is nothing else to cosider

Question 19

what is the problem of marginal cases

Answer 19

people who are severely disabled mentally, infants, all have limited/no reason but we still consider them human and treat them well

Question 20

what is equal consideration of interests

Answer 20

Equal consideration of interests; if the dog has an interest in not feeling pain and I have the same interest, we have to weigh the interests the same. The dogs is no more or less than mine.

Question 21

what is speciesism

Answer 21

To violate the principle of interests; this is the same as racism. To have bias for the members of your own species. This is the same as racism; giving more weight to the pleasure and pain of a human being is not fair.

Question 22

give examples of speciesism

Answer 22

Speciesism examples;

1. The meat industry; how we treat animals. Eating meat is not necessary for survival/healthiness, we just eat meat for the pleasure of it. Have to balance the pleasure we take in eating meat and the interests of the animals. We consider our own interest more than the animals and this is specieisism.
2. We treat dogs and cats better than pigs and chickens, there are laws for dogs but not for pigs. We give more weight to the interest in eating pigs than the interest of the pig and having a decent life.
3. Experiments on animals; argument is that we need to test on them to save lives, but obviously we experiment on animals for other reasons (cosmetics and shampoo). We force rabbit’s eyes open and pour shampoo into them to see how damaging it might be to the eyes. Our interests are considered more important than the rabbits.
4. vivisection; when you open an animal that is still alive and test certain things (like heart beat) and you need to keep the animal alive (this is done on apes and other mammals) Argument is that this is necessary to save lives of humans. Singer proposes a thouh experiment; consider similar human beings to apes and mammals (infants and mentally disabled— in terms of reason and capacity to feel pleasure and pain). Would we be willing to do the same on the humans in order to save lives? If not, we consider our lives and interests more than the other animals.
5. In philosophy; singer was one of the first the write on animal ethics. One of the aims of philosophy is to question what people generally take for granted. And when we do not do that with animals, it is showing a bias (not as strong as other points, but it still counts.) In equality literature we talk about the equality between men and women, whites and blacks, but never with animals in philosophy and that is not good.

Question 23

what is capacity based conception of equality

Answer 23

capacity based conception of equality;
remember that singer proposes the principle of equal consideration— what is this conception? This is the view that equality depends on our capacities. E.g. when we say all human beings are equal we say that they have the same capacityies. When we say that men and women are qequal we say that hace the same capcities. Take the example of the right to vote; men and women have same rational capaities and they have equal rights to vote.
Singer rejects this because if you use this conception, then animals should have the same right to vote. He talks about a few problems with this conception;
1. the inegalitarian concequences; suppose we make 2 groups of humans beings (one group of abobe 100 IQ and the other below) obviously these two groups are not of same capacityies because they have different IQ’s so this says that we should treat them differently. This says that the higher IQ should be masters and below should be slaves (for example). The capacity based theory says that it will always be able to group people and justify different treatments.

Question 24

does singer agree or reject capacity based conceptions of equality

Answer 24

rejects

Question 25

why does singer reject capacity based conceptions of equality

Answer 25

the view claims that our demands for equality should be based on our capacities

Question 26

what problems does singer bring up with capacity based conceptions of equality

Answer 26

1. it can lead to inegalitarian conclusions
2. What if there is a difference in capacities?

What if there is, afterall, a difference? In terms of capacities between men and women or blacks and white, this would entail that we do not have to treat them equally, so it would be a problem for capacity based equality.
Jensen (in the 60’s) studied the IQ of black and white americans, he found out that the IQ’s were very different, there are 2 ways to explain the difference. One way— due to social and environmental factors. Or— due to genetics. (nature and nurture debate) Jensen’s view was that social factrs can only explain a small part of the difference, the majority was for genetics (he was considered a racist). Singer says that equality should not be based o a matter of fact— matter of fact cannot tell us how to treat people. We have to treat people based on morals. So the study does not tell us how we should treat people at all, even if the study was true, it dioesnt tell us how to treat people. It says that we should allow black people to have access tothe best schools to compensate for the difference, for example.