Sample Ethics Paper on Sport, Animals and Society

Ethics

Question One                                                                        

Regan is of the view that individuals with sentimental interests in animals owe them direct duties and that their inherent value is as much as that of humans.  According to Reagan, although animals lack rights, individuals who have sentimental interest in them ought to protect them. As long as we have people with sentimental interests on animals, then it is their duty to protect them (Regan n.p.). However, if no such people exist, then the pain and death suffered by such animals while real, is, nonetheless, not wrong.

Carl Cohen is a strong advocate of the idea that animals have, and cannot possess moral rights. In this sense, he seems to defend the moral propriety of the many individuals who inflict suffering, pain and death to animals. However, Cohen maintains that an entity ought to be viewed as the bearer of right in case the entity in question possesses the ability to make moral claims and also respond to them.

Question Two

Mary Anne Warren is a strong critique of Regan’s argument regarding the fundamental moral rights of animals. She contends that the strong animal rights view held by Regan is flawed.

She argues that the strength of a being’s rights differs based on its likely level of mental sophistication and the likelihood that it is sentient. This is in keeping with her “weak animal rights theory” which according to Warren, “allows the rights of animals of different kinds to vary in strengths” (Warren 166). Such variation in strength thus warrants our killing of animals in the absence of other means of realising vital goals like clothing and feeding ourselves (Gillet and Gilbert 135). Warren is of the opinion that beings capable of sentience, which entails many animals and human beings, have rights.

Works Cited

Gillett, James and Michelle Gilbert. Sport, Animals and Society. London: Routledge, 2013. Print.

https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=pcNiAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=Warr

n+strength+of+a+being%E2%80%99s+rights+varies&source=bl&ots=nxCCcTnlwa&sig=

XoBbJi0qebAhTM6O3OrXyJhwA&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Warren%2

strength%20of%20a%20being%E2%80%99s%20rights%20varies&f=false

Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights. In Peter Singer (ed), In Defense of Animals.  New York:

Basil Blackwell, 1985, Print. http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/regan03.htm

Warren, Mary A. Difficulties with the strong animal rights position. 1986. Web. 19 June 2017.

digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1475&context=bts