APA Citation
Singer, P., & Regan, T. (Eds.). (1976). Animal rights and human obligations. Prentice-Hall.
Intellectual & Historical Context
Published in 1976, Animal Rights and Human Obligations is a seminal anthology that helped shape contemporary discussions on animal ethics. Edited by Peter Singer, a leading utilitarian philosopher, and Tom Regan, a deontological advocate for animal rights, the book presents a broad spectrum of philosophical perspectives on the moral status of animals. The work emerges in response to growing concerns about industrial farming, vivisection, and speciesism, all of which gained traction in the 1970s due to the rise of environmentalism, the animal liberation movement, and advances in cognitive ethology.
Singer’s contributions reflect his utilitarian approach, emphasizing the reduction of animal suffering and advocating for a re-evaluation of traditional human-animal hierarchies. His landmark book Animal Liberation (1975) introduced the concept of speciesism and catalyzed the modern animal rights movement. Regan, in contrast, champions a deontological perspective, asserting that animals possess inherent moral rights and should not merely be protected from suffering but recognized as moral subjects with entitlements.
The volume integrates historical and contemporary texts, showcasing views from Aristotle, Kant, Bentham, Darwin, and Descartes, alongside modern contributions by philosophers and scientists. This structure highlights the historical evolution of human attitudes toward animals, juxtaposing classical defenses of human superiority with emerging ethical frameworks that advocate for animal liberation.
Thesis Statement
The book argues that traditional justifications for human dominion over animals are philosophically flawed and morally indefensible. Through a collection of essays, it critiques anthropocentric moral frameworks, challenges the Cartesian and contractarian views that exclude animals from ethical consideration, and explores whether animals can be said to possess rights akin to human rights. Singer and Regan’s overarching goal is to establish a rational foundation for moral obligations toward animals, either through the utilitarian reduction of suffering (Singer) or the recognition of animals as rights-bearers (Regan).
Key Concepts
- Speciesism (Singer)
- The unjustified bias in favor of one’s own species over others, akin to racism or sexism.
- Challenges moral frameworks that prioritize human interests over animal suffering.
- Utilitarian Ethics (Singer)
- Moral actions should maximize pleasure and minimize pain.
- Since many animals can suffer, their interests should be weighed equally with human interests.
- Inherent Value (Regan)
- Animals are subjects-of-a-life, possessing inherent value beyond their utility to humans.
- Ethical considerations should not be based solely on sentience but on the recognition of moral rights.
- The Factory Farming Critique
- Modern industrial agriculture subjects animals to extreme suffering for economic efficiency.
- Ethical implications of intensive rearing methods and the commodification of animal life.
- The Vivisection Debate
- Ethical justifications for and against the use of animals in scientific research.
- Examines whether potential human benefits can outweigh harm to individual animals.
- Historical Perspectives on Animal Ethics
- Aristotle: Defined humans as “rational animals,” justifying human superiority.
- Descartes: Viewed animals as automata, incapable of thought or suffering.
- Bentham: Advocated for moral consideration based on an animal’s ability to suffer.
- Kant: Denied direct duties to animals, arguing they only matter indirectly (as harming them could lead to harming humans).
- Legal and Moral Rights for Animals
- Debates whether animals can hold rights in the same sense as humans.
- Joel Feinberg and James Rachels argue for recognizing legal entitlements for animals.
- The Vegetarian Imperative
- Ethical and environmental arguments against meat consumption.
- Advocates for plant-based diets as a moral obligation.
Chapter Summaries
The book Animal Rights and Human Obligations, edited by Peter Singer and Tom Regan, is structured as an anthology, bringing together philosophical, ethical, and scientific perspectives on the treatment of animals. The chapters are divided into key thematic sections, covering contemporary realities, historical views on animal and human nature, moral obligations toward animals, and the debate on animal rights.
I. Contemporary Realities
1. “Down on the Factory Farm” – Peter Singer
Singer examines the realities of modern industrial farming, exposing the inhumane conditions of factory farming. He critiques the economic rationalization of suffering, where efficiency is prioritized over animal welfare. Chickens, pigs, and cattle endure extreme confinement, painful mutilations (such as debeaking), and systematic deprivation. Singer argues that consumers are complicit in this system and must reconsider their dietary choices.
2. “Experiments on Animals” – Richard Ryder
Ryder presents a moral critique of vivisection (animal experimentation), coining the term “speciesism” to describe the arbitrary discrimination against animals. He documents the widespread suffering caused by medical and psychological experiments, highlighting cases where nonhuman animals endure painful and unnecessary procedures. Ryder argues that alternatives must be explored, as human benefit does not morally justify extreme suffering.
II. Animal and Human Nature
This section traces the historical evolution of human perspectives on animals, juxtaposing classical views that deny moral consideration with emerging challenges to human exceptionalism.
3. “God Created Man in His Own Image” – The Bible
The biblical account of human dominion over animals has historically shaped attitudes toward animal exploitation. This passage justifies anthropocentrism, presenting humans as divinely sanctioned rulers over nature.
4. “How Humans Differ from Other Creatures” – Aristotle
Aristotle defines humans as rational animals, distinguishing them from nonhuman animals, which he views as lacking reason and existing for human use. This hierarchical view influenced Western ethical traditions, reinforcing human superiority.
5. “Differences Between Rational and Other Creatures” – Saint Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas builds on Aristotle’s ideas, integrating them into Christian theology. He argues that animals, lacking rational souls, exist to serve human purposes. However, he warns against cruelty, not for the sake of animals but because it could encourage vice in human behavior.
6. “Animals Are Machines” – René Descartes
Descartes’ mechanistic philosophy presents animals as automata—biological machines without thoughts or feelings. This Cartesian view justified vivisection and the treatment of animals as objects. Descartes’ legacy profoundly influenced scientific experimentation on animals.
7. “A Reply to Descartes” – Voltaire
Voltaire ridicules Descartes’ claim that animals lack feeling, arguing that observable behavior (such as a dog’s cries of pain) clearly indicates consciousness. He defends compassionate treatment of animals.
8. “Of the Reason of Animals” – David Hume
Hume challenges the rationalist tradition, arguing that animals do possess thought and learning abilities, albeit in a more instinctual form. He emphasizes continuity between human and animal cognition.
9. “Comparison of the Mental Powers of Man and the Lower Animals” – Charles Darwin
Darwin’s evolutionary theory disrupts human exceptionalism, arguing that mental faculties exist on a biological continuum. He provides empirical evidence that animals experience emotions, intelligence, and problem-solving abilities.
10. “The Language of Animals” – Michel de Montaigne
Montaigne argues that animals communicate in their own ways, challenging the assumption that language is unique to humans. This supports the idea that animals possess cognition and self-awareness.
11. “Teaching Chimpanzees to Communicate” – Peter Jenkins
Jenkins discusses experiments with primate language acquisition, particularly in chimpanzees learning American Sign Language (ASL). These findings challenge Descartes’ linguistic argument for human superiority.
12. “The Concept of Beastliness” – Mary Midgley
Midgley critiques the stereotype of animals as violent and bestial, arguing that humans project their fears onto animals. She challenges the cultural association between animals and immorality.
III. Do Humans Have Obligations to Other Animals?
This section explores moral obligations, analyzing whether humans owe ethical duties to animals and on what grounds.
13. “Animals and Slavery” – Aristotle
Aristotle defends human ownership of animals, drawing a parallel between slavery and the natural subjugation of nonhuman animals.
14. “Of Eating of Flesh” – Plutarch
Plutarch offers an early vegetarian argument, condemning meat-eating as unnecessary and barbaric. He suggests that humans eat animals for pleasure, not necessity, making the practice morally indefensible.
15. “On Killing Living Things and the Duty to Love Irrational Creatures” – Saint Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas reinforces the Christian duty of kindness, arguing that cruelty to animals is wrong only insofar as it affects human morality. He denies that animals have intrinsic moral worth.
16. “Duties to Animals” – Immanuel Kant
Kant affirms that humans have no direct duties to animals but should avoid cruelty because it might encourage inhumane treatment of people.
17. “A Critique of Kant” – Arthur Schopenhauer
Schopenhauer rebukes Kant, arguing that compassion for animals is a genuine moral duty. He criticizes the cold rationalism of Kant’s ethics.
18. “A Utilitarian View” – Jeremy Bentham
Bentham shifts moral consideration to sentience, famously declaring:
“The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”
This utilitarian criterion for moral worth challenges rationalist and theological justifications for animal exploitation.
19. “A Defense of Bentham” – John Stuart Mill
Mill extends Bentham’s argument, advocating equal consideration of interests regardless of species.
20. “The Ethic of Reverence for Life” – Albert Schweitzer
Schweitzer develops a biocentric ethic, advocating respect for all life, including animals.
21. “The Humanities of Diet” – Henry S. Salt
Salt builds on vegetarian ethics, arguing that a diet based on killing is morally inconsistent with humanitarian ideals.
22. “All Animals Are Equal” – Peter Singer
Singer provides a comprehensive argument for species equality, arguing that suffering must be ethically weighted regardless of species.
IV. Do Animals Have Rights?
This section debates whether animals should be recognized as rights-holders.
23. “Animals’ Rights” – Henry S. Salt
Salt argues that justice demands recognizing animal rights, much like the abolition of human slavery.
24. “Can Animals Have Rights?” – Joel Feinberg
Feinberg explores the philosophical basis of animal legal rights, arguing that rights should not be restricted to humans.
25. “Do Animals Have a Right to Life?” – Tom Regan
Regan argues that if humans have a right to life, so do animals who are subjects-of-a-life. His deontological framework rejects the utilitarian focus on suffering alone.
26. “Do Animals Have a Right to Liberty?” – James Rachels
Rachels argues that animals should have liberty rights, such as freedom from confinement and exploitation.
Epilogue
The book closes with literary reflections, including Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal, drawing darkly satirical parallels between animal slaughter and human ethical hypocrisy.
Key Quotes and Their Significance
1. The Argument Against Speciesism (Peter Singer)
“The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?” – Jeremy Bentham (quoted by Singer)
Significance
This quote forms the philosophical foundation of Singer’s utilitarian argument for animal rights. By shifting moral consideration from rationality to sentience, Bentham and Singer dismantle traditional justifications for human superiority over animals. If suffering is morally relevant, then animals deserve equal consideration of interests, just as humans do.
2. The Inherent Value of Animals (Tom Regan)
“The fundamental wrong is the system that allows us to view animals as our resources, here for us—to be eaten, or surgically manipulated, or exploited for sport or money.”
Significance
Regan’s deontological approach rejects utilitarian cost-benefit calculations, instead emphasizing moral rights. Animals are subjects-of-a-life, meaning they possess inherent worth beyond their utility to humans. This radical abolitionist stance challenges reformist approaches that seek merely to reduce suffering without ending exploitation.
3. The Critique of Cartesian Mechanism (Voltaire)
“It seems to me that nature has given the same sensations to animals as to ourselves. Why should they not have the same moral consideration?”
Significance
Voltaire mocks Descartes’ claim that animals are thoughtless machines, arguing that their observable behaviors demonstrate pain and consciousness. This empirical critique prefigures modern cognitive ethology, which provides scientific evidence of animal intelligence and emotions.
4. The Moral Failure of Meat Consumption (Plutarch)
“You ask me why I abstain from eating meat? I, for my part, am astonished that you can eat the flesh of dead creatures.”
Significance
Plutarch’s early vegetarian advocacy is based on the idea that humans do not need meat for survival and consume it out of habit and pleasure, not necessity. His argument remains central to modern vegan ethics, which condemns meat-eating as an unnecessary moral harm.
5. The Failure of Anthropocentric Ethics (Schopenhauer)
“Compassion for animals is intimately associated with goodness of character, and it may be confidently asserted that he who is cruel to animals cannot be a good man.”
Significance
Schopenhauer rejects Kant’s view that we have no direct moral duties to animals. Instead, he argues that cruelty to animals reveals moral corruption in human character. This critique challenges contractarian views, which exclude animals from ethical consideration.
Significance and Impact of the Work
1. Foundational Text for Animal Ethics
- Animal Rights and Human Obligations remains a cornerstone of animal ethics, combining utilitarian, deontological, and historical perspectives.
- It bridges philosophy and activism, equipping the animal rights movement with rigorous ethical arguments.
2. Influence on Animal Law and Policy
- Inspired legal efforts to grant personhood status to animals (e.g., great apes).
- Strengthened animal welfare regulations, influencing bans on factory farming practices and cosmetic testing.
- Advocated abolitionist veganism rather than reformist welfare measures.
3. Criticism and Counterarguments
Utilitarianism (Singer’s Approach)
- Problem: Utilitarianism permits sacrificing some individuals for the greater good.
- Critique: Does not recognize individual moral rights—it only seeks to reduce suffering.
- Response: Singer argues that pragmatic reforms (e.g., reducing factory farming) have a greater real-world impact than absolute abolitionist demands.
Deontology (Regan’s Approach)
- Problem: Regan’s theory excludes many animals (e.g., insects, mollusks) that lack complex mental lives.
- Critique: Too rigid—does not allow exceptions for life-saving medical research.
- Response: Regan argues that human and animal rights must be morally consistent, even if inconvenient.
4. Legacy and Future Directions
- Mainstreaming Animal Rights: Helped shift animal rights from a fringe issue to a mainstream ethical concern.
- Veganism and Environmental Ethics: Strengthened the case for plant-based diets as both an ethical and ecological necessity.
- The Ongoing Debate: Continues to inspire discussion on artificial meat, legal rights for animals, and ethical consumption.