He specialises in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a secular, utilitarian perspective he is known in particular for his book animal liberation ( 1975), in which he argues in favour of vegetarianism, and his essay famine, affluence, and morality, in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global. Utilitarianism utilitarianism is an ethical theory that defends that we should act in ways that bring about as much happiness as possible in the world this theory defends the following three things: (1) what is good for individuals is that the amount of happiness (or satisfaction of desires) is as high as possible (2) what is best. The difference in tom regan's and peter singer's positon on animal rights - mbogo wa wambui - essay - philosophy - philosophy of the present - publish your bachelor's or master's thesis being a utilitarian, singer's position is one that seeks to maximize satisfaction of interests whether they are of humans or animals. [fn2] utilitarianism, singer argues, is untouched by the complexities required to make deontological moral theories--including rights theory--applicable in concrete moral humans have failed to do this, singer argues, because of a species bias, or speciesism, that results in a systematic devaluation of animal interests. Speciesism involves the assignment of different values, rights, or special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership the term is sometimes used by animal rights advocates, who argue that speciesism is a prejudice similar to racism or sexism, in that the treatment of individuals is predicated.
Template:under construction this page contains a detailed summary of jonathan glover's book utilitarianism and its critics, a compilation of essays published in 1990. Because animals are capable of suffering, they should be considered in a utilitarian view to create the most happiness and minimize suffering singer further argues against speciesism, discrimination based on a certain species, in that all beings capable of suffering should be worthy of equal consideration. Utilitarianism, by john stuart mill, is an essay written to provide support for the value of utilitarianism as a moral theory, and to respond to misconceptions about it mill defines utilitarianism as a theory based on the principle that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce. Looking through the lens of utilitarianism, we will investigate the ethics behind eating meat as a modern individual and whether one who calls speciesism is wrong just as racism is wrong in the ethical theory of utilitarianism, because equal consideration amongst interest-holding entities is a base.
Peter singer popularized the term and focused on the way speciesism, without moral justification, favors the interests of humans: utilitarians have traditionally argued that the truly morally important feature of beings is unappreciated when we focus on personhood or the rational, self-reflective nature of. He adopted the utilitarian principle that moral judgements should be made based on equal interests (for example, an interest in not suffering) irrespective of sex, ethnicity, or now, species to make a distinction between humans and non‐ humans is “speciesism”, an argument no better than sexism or racism go to.
Utilitarianism and holism offer ethical theories that in principle could defend zoos, but both, it is argued, are less especially noteworthy, and as befits the objectives of this book, the present essay attempts to take some modest to the very prejudice— speciesism—singer is intent upon silencing utilitarianism and. For singer, a utilitarian, the qualified protection provided by animal welfare legislation reflects a failure to give equal consideration to the interests of animals in turn, this failure reflects 'speciesism' — an irrational, discriminatory and morally unjustifiable preference for the interests of humans over animals.