User:Ofir S/bagrut project
Do Animals have rights?
Animals are a tremendous group of creatures, who have several characteristics that set them apart from other living things:
- Reproduction and development.
- Feel and respond to information from their surroundings.
Humans have several characteristics considered as animal as well, but because of their uniqueness, they are not called animals but humans. Because of the proximity between humans and animals (like the fact that animals have souls and they feel the things that surround them) there is a feeling among people that animals must have rights just like humans. On the other hand, there are people across the world that feel that humans are supreme beings on earth and only humans must have rights – meaning they can do whatever they want to animals. My project on "Animal Rights" will answer the question – "Do animals have rights?" My reasons for choosing this research question are: - I am interested in knowing which kind of animals have rights and in which countries across the world they have them. - I have a dog and a cat at home, so I decided to know more about their legal rights. Research process and the findings
The information that I want to investigate:
Do animals have rights at all? - The opinions of those who are for and against giving rights to animals and their arguments - To find out If in Israel and the USA the rights for animals are documented - The opinion of some philosophers on the subject - Compare the legal conditions of animals in the past and today To investigate these issues, I first assessed information from known sites that summarize the subject of animal rights. Then, I summarized the information again so it will fit (and fit it to answer and expand the issues). Finally, when a lot of subjects, apart from my issues were lying in front of me, I chose what to add to my summary. The Main Topics \ Paragraphs that I focused in the project: - Animal's rights – Do animals have rights at all? - Comparing between the legal condition of the animals in the past and today. - The role animals played in human's society. - The opinion for/against giving animals rights. - The personal philosophy of Peter Singer (Australian philosopher that wrote books on animal's liberation) and Tom Regan (American philosopher that hold the world-view that humans can use animals to Conclusion – summary of the project
Do animals have rights?
Animals have played a role in human society since civilization began. At first, animals were hunted for food, and their skins and bones were used for clothing, shelter and tools. Later, animals were domesticated and used as beasts of burden, for food and clothing, and eventually for many other purposes. Today most of us accept the idea that people — farmers, pet owners, animal breeders, zoo keepers and research scientists — may use animals but are obliged to treat them decently. The US even has anti-cruelty laws to ensure the humane treatment of animals. However, some people think that we should change the relationship between humans and animals. They do not accept the notion that it is appropriate for humans to interfere with the lives of animals. This is the guiding philosophy behind what is called the "animal rights movement." Those who accept this view in its entirety reject all human use of animals, whether for food or clothing, as pets or companions, to race or ride for sport, or in medical research and product safety testing. In 1975, Australian philosopher Peter Singer wrote a book called Animal Liberation in which he argued that humans should not use animals. Singer’s ideas are based on utilitarianism, one of many philosophies developed in the 17th and 18th centuries to help people decide what is right and wrong without invoking the Bible or other moral authorities. Utilitarians say we should judge actions strictly upon their consequences. That is, an action is good if it provides the greatest benefit to the largest number of individuals. Singer took this notion further and said that when we calculate consequences, we must take into account the interests not only of human beings but also of animals that can experience pain and pleasure. If we fail to consider these animals’ interests, or if we give human beings special consideration, we are guilty of "speciesism." To Singer, animal research is morally acceptable if the benefits to humans or animals used clearly outweigh the harm to the animals used in the research. He usually concludes that the cost to the animals outweighs the benefit to others. Another animal rights view was put forth by American philosopher Tom Regan in a 1983 book, The Case for Animal Rights. Regan holds that people as well as many animals are entitled to certain rights simply because they have a basic understanding of the world and some sense of what they want from life. Regan’s version of this rights-based philosophy says that most mammals older than one year qualify for basic rights, e.g., the right to live without human interference. Regan argues that it is wrong to deprive animals of their rights or for humans to use animals to serve their own needs and interests. Singer, Regan, and others have used explanations of animal rights to win agreement with their belief that human beings should not use animals. However, this is a radical notion, given all the ways that human beings are dependent upon animals for life and livelihood. A more common-sense approach is to recognize that there are compelling reasons to use animals for medical research and other purposes, and at the same time to affirm our obligation to treat animals with compassion. Today, in advanced counties like Israel, the U.S, Western Europe and others there are clear rules on the subject of the treatment to animals. For example, in Israel there is a prohibition to hurt animals and to abuse them. The punishment for a person who will abuse an animal can even be sent to prison! There is also a non-profit organization that deals with the subject of animal rights. They take care of abandoned animals, prosecute humans who hurt their animals and in general uphold animal rights. In conclusion, in the past, animals had deficient rights and suffered from a bad treatment by humans. Today however, the status of animals is different. Every animal has rights that protect it from abuse or bad treatment by humans in most of the countries in the world. Feedback
My Personal comments on how the research went: My research didn't go smoothly as I planed. I found it more difficult than I expected to summarize information about animal rights. I also had difficulties choosing which philosophers to add to my project in order to add another opinion and decide whether it was really necessary to add them. Eventually, I decided that was necessary and I chose Peter Singer and Tom Regan. But after choosing the issues to investigate and after assessing the information about the project from the internet, I started to summarize the text "Do animals have rights" and everything went smoothly. I found it interesting to investigate the subject of animal rights and that there is a law that protects animals, at least in Israel.
- The free encyclopedia - Wikipedia ( ://en.wikipedia.org )
- The site of Israeli non-profit organization – "Tno Lhaiot Lehiot" - http://www.letlive.org.il/article.php?id=709
- The site of "ASPCA" – The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_home - The *pictures in the project are from Wikipedia.
My project on PPT
That's my project on the authorstream. I did'nt uploud the file to the youtube yet, becouse for some reason I cant hear my record but u can hear it if u downloding it to your computer. so for now here is the adrewss: (Nellie if u can show me how to use the record so I can hear it on the authorstream I'll be grateful). My project on the authorstream