Free Essay Sample: Ethical Views on Animal and Human Morality

1(a) Steinbock explains in the first full paragraph on page 251, how her view differs from Singer's. Explain the difference as precisely as you can in your own words.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Steinbock opposes Steinbock's idea, where he argues that non-human animals are capable of experiencing suffering the same case with people who have the freedom to marry and vote. Singer explains that moral justification is essential when one decides to refuse to suffer. So, equality is the principle that guarantees both animals and individuals equal share. For instance, feeding starving kids before taking care of hungry dogs is like Catholic caring for non-Catholics without minding their Catholics (Steinbock 251). Steinbock is against animal discrimination and advocates for equality among the creatures. Hence, Singer wants people to care for their friends or relatives before stretching their hands to assist strangers. In comparison, Singer reiterates the importance of caring for all people without discrimination. For example, he explains how a catholic agency could care for everybody irrespective of occupation, social status, and class.

(b) In the next paragraph, Steinbock suggests that Singer's view has counter-intuitive results. What are these counter-intuitive results?

Counter-intuitive results obtained from this reading are against the morals that are accepted by the people or community. According to Steinbock, individuals should take care of children before minding the animals. It is not morally competent to discriminate against animals because they also need attention. For instance, if a dog is starving, one should provide necessities like food and other essential things. Hence, human beings are unique compared to animals since they can think and reason, so they require special treatment and care.

(c) Is Steinbock right that the results are counter-intuitive?

From Steinbock, the results are counter-intuitive because he considers what is essential first rather than concentrating on things that uphold morals. According to him, people should meet their close relative's expectations rather than prioritize the unknown once. For example, whether a company or employer should recruit persons from the same ethnic community, or race, and share the typical originality. From the reading, Steinbock feels right for his dog, unlike a stranger kid, although he advocates feeding the child before the dog.

(d) What weight should we attach to such counter-intuitive results in assessing Singer's view?

I optimistically endorse Singer's counter-intuitive results because individuals should maintain domestic animals like dogs, cats, and others by providing the necessities. In most cases, people concentrate on meeting their desires or interests rather than those of animals because they are devalued and discriminated against. They believe people need worthy and dignity. Hence, I think the moral gulf should not separate animals and humans because they are all creatures.

(2) (a) In the long paragraph that goes from pages 252 to 253, Steinbock points to three capacities, that are characteristic of humans, and which she takes to justify giving humans elevated moral status. What are these three capacities?

The first capability is intrinsic dignity, which explains the differences between humans and animals by emphasizing the importance of maintaining human worth. Individuals are responsible for their actions since they respect their moral autonomy. Secondly, individuals are required to reciprocate since they are not motivated by good seasons or altruism, where they need fair treatment (Steinbock 252). For instance, people are motivated by recognizing that every person experiences pain during suffering. Also, people cannot confront animals due to the harm they do to them because they lack moral reasoning or thinking capability. For example, when rats surround the house, biting kids while carrying disease, no one can argue with them to convince them of their injustice. Lastly, self-respect makes a person to be identified with their responsibilities to make them realize their potential. For example, some animals may have intellectual capabilities, self-determination, and freedom to achieve their goals, but they need self-respect to treat others with dignity and not slaves.

(b) Is possession of these three capacities sufficient to justify the elevated moral status Steinbock wants to give to humans?

When persons have capabilities, like intrinsic dignity, self-respect, and ability, a reciprocate them able to handle life situations, unlike animals. Humans have the intellectual capacity to solve issues that affect them both socially, economically, and politically, and this makes them different from animals.

(3) (a) In the second full paragraph on page 254, Steinbock considers a reply Singer might make to her argument. What is the reply?

The reply is that the moral differences between animals and humans give us the basis for the kind of treatment we offer. For example, Singer emphasizes on equality whereby individuals have moral worth, unlike non-human animals (Steinbock 254).

(b) How does Steinbock respond to this reply?

Steinbock indicates that intelligence is a virtue that makes a person have a moral responsibility and disregard the issues of discrimination associated with race. Weighing people with strong capabilities more profoundly than those who have less is irrelevant in terms of equality. So, individuals have the privilege to advocate proper ways in the community.

(4) (a) In the last full paragraph on page 254, Steinbock argues that we cannot separate the question of the value of an entity's life from the issue of the importance of its suffering in the way that Singer wants to do. Explain her argument.

It means that the value of human beings is more excellent, unlike that of animals, because they possess intellectual capacities, although they cannot avoid suffering. Valuing people more than animals is a matter of individual interest because their suffering brings severe impacts to the community, unlike animals (Steinbock 254). For example, a person who is in pain cannot work or perform his/her responsibility adequately, a situation that limits the growth of the economy. Human beings have a remarkable influence on the public building compared to animals because they can reason, think, and act.

(b) In the first full paragraph on page 255, Steinbock addresses the problem of marginal cases. What is her response to the challenge?

Steinbock compares the mistakes people make in society despite having higher capacities. She argues that animals perform their task well irrespective of their lesser capabilities, particularly chimpanzees and monkeys. Also, she blames the experiment that compares animals with human beings because people have a strong capacity to make life decisions. So, it is not good to kill a person because his/her life cannot be compared to non-human animals like pigs.

(c) How plausible is this response?

The argument is plausible because a child is born with inheritable characteristics from the parents and not with the same capability as animals like pigs. So, individuals are different from animals because they can handle their real-life situations as they can reason and make remarkable decisions.

(d) How different are the implications of Singer's and Steinbock's views on the morality of factory farming?

According to Singer, both human beings and animals should have equal treatment because they share various features. In comparison, Steinbock views human beings are more special than animals, and they deserve specific care since they have greater capabilities like monkeys, pigs, and chimpanzees. People have the capacity to control all living species since they understand their importance in the ecosystem. In real-life situations, people would prefer to recruit intellectual people in prominent working positions because they would perform their taste adequately compared to untrained and inexperienced ones. This is comparable to individuals and animals since people have a greater capacity to reason and think and handle devastating circumstances that surround them. However, it needs a collaborative effort to control different species in the ecosystem to ensure life continuity.

Work Cited

Steinbock, Bonnie. "Speciesism and the Idea of Equality." Philosophy, vol. 53, no. 204, 1978, pp. 247-256.