Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barden)
    the generally accepted definition is being 'conscious of oneself'....as in "i think therefore i am"
    There are issues with the cogito but this isn't the place for it. Also I've not looked into them that carefully (I fell asleep for that lecture, but I might get the resources this summer for it).
    But anyway, surely to be able to feel pain is some form of self awareness.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blinkbelle)
    Is that something we should be proud of?
    Regardless: don't be so patronising.

    of course not, but if it were not true we wouldn't be the dominant lifeform today, since physically we're actually pretty ****
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lauren__x)
    I think they deffinatly should be treated equal in a lot of ways, its awful that some people think its ok to harm a defenseless animal. I think it upsets me almost as much as the thought of someone harming a child.
    I could never hurt an animal. Aw I love animals and Im a vegetarian.
    I think exactly the same as this. :o:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barden)
    of course not, but if it were not true we wouldn't be the dominant lifeform today, since physically we're actually pretty ****
    How is that relevant at all to this thread?:confused:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    There are issues with the cogito but this isn't the place for it. Also I've not looked into them that carefully (I fell asleep for that lecture, but I might get the resources this summer for it).
    But anyway, surely to be able to feel pain is some form of self awareness.

    what do you study btw, i do zoology with animal behavior
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barden)
    of course not, but if it were not true we wouldn't be the dominant lifeform today, since physically we're actually pretty ****
    so if this is on topic, I presume it is:
    Power> Equality based ideologies in your opinion?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barden)
    what do you study btw, i do zoology with animal behavior
    Philosophy, half way through an animals in philosophy module.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blinkbelle)
    How is that relevant at all to this thread?:confused:


    its not, but i was answering your question as to whether we should be proud that we have a superiority complex - to which my answer is "no, but we should be thankful of it"
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Philosophy, half way through an animals in philosophy module.

    ah right
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    They have rights if we give them rights. Rights aren't a natural thing that everyone or everything is entitled to, you have to take them or be given them.

    Non-human animals aren't intelligent enough to understand the concept of rights or respect the rights of other creatures. They aren't intelligent enough to have social responsibility or to be held accountable if they violate rights.

    But I don't think you should be cruel to them either. Animal welfare for me is a more reasonable approach than animal rights.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I'm going to let "There's to much love" all the work.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomheppy)
    I'm going to let "There's to much love" all the work.
    I'm not an army, but I take that to mean "I agree fully with everything you've said because you're totally awesome, and not fat at all"
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    For the sake of the thread, with regards to rights in a strict sense of the word:

    http://www.iep.utm.edu/bentham/#SH5b

    Is my view.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, they do. Yes, I have gone out of my way (and further) to ensure that an animal is well-treated and cared for. Yes, I do feel that animals deserve to be treated (in many ways) the same as humans.

    And I don't understand people who don't feel this way too. That's not me being ignorant, either.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Colour Me Pretty)
    But are they happier?
    Look at the ducks or whatever goes into Foi Grass, is said to taste better from battery ones. But the fact they are force fed till their stomach expands.They can't be very happy.
    While I agree that Foi Grass and certain intensive farming techniques are cruel and inhumane, do you believe that chickens are capable of feeling an emotion as complex as happiness as we humans feel?

    I think some of that is anthropomorphising animals.

    But then again scientists make mice depressed by letting other mice bully them to test antidepressants... If they can feel depressed maybe they can feel happy... Follows logically if not scientifically.

    lol, I'm confusing myself. I'll shut up now.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    You don't understand what rights are, unless you're referring to natural rights, like the op you've not said. I'm sure you understand the man made concept of a legal right.

    With your lion example:
    “it would be nonsensical to hold a lion morally responsible for the death of a gnu. As far as we know, lions aren’t the sort of creatures that can engage in deliberations about the morality of such behaviours. Similarly however, an infant cannot be held responsible for destroying an original sculpture, or a child held culpable for accidentally shooting her sister. Animals are not moral agents."
    Page 344 Of a companion to ethics-peter singer
    Note: there's a difference between moral agents and moral patience.
    I understand entirely what rights are, they just don't exist in anything but the imagination of a human being. You can't sit an animal down and talk to it about its rights. Two humans can indulge themselves with talks about rights but it doesn't change the fact that before they were born and after they die, what "rights" they had are irrelevant. Rights are basically things prescribed to you by other human beings with more power, anyway. Much in the same way as we are trying to do here with animals. If the powerful influences in our lives decided that actually, they're not going to give us rights any more then likewise we would have no "rights." Which is where we are with animals - we can give them an illusion of rights if we want but we're still going to round them up and slaughter them at t'end of the day. Which to me says they've no rights, except when it's convenient to us.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We're humans; we're animals. :yep:

    However, that also means that every argument in this thread is coming from a human perspective. :p:

    Also, what is your definition of 'rights'? If having 'rights' means having a say in affairs such as government/politics, human society, or something inherently multi-faceted like that, then of course not; before any such approach could even start to be considered, one would have to work out how to communicate the ideas to every participant, and ensure their cooperation...:lolwut:. Sooner you than me. :p:

    If, however, having 'rights' refers to being treated fairly - such as lives not being taken for purely sadistic reasons, letting all lives be lived without undue aggravation, et cetera - then yes, every living thing has those 'rights', or at least they should. :yes:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    I'm not an army, but I take that to mean "I agree fully with everything you've said because you're totally awesome, and not fat at all"
    Pretty much.Also I'm wasted.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Animals are also sentient by the definition of the word:

    "Sentient:
    “A. 1. That feels or is capable of feeling’ having the power or function of sensation or of perception by the senses.”1
    “B. Conscious or percipient of something.”2"
    At least for the most part (taken from the Oxford English dictionary).
    Are they actually sentient though??

    Can it not be said Animals are like computers in that they react to stimuli with set procedures??
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Politics Guy)
    Are they actually sentient though??

    Can it not be said Animals are like computers in that they react to stimuli with set procedures??
    Like I said, that's the problem of other minds.
    This should be of interest:
    http://www.iep.utm.edu/solipsis/
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.