Regan’s and Singer’s articles Discussion, sociology homework help

Try to attempt to take the conversation further by examining their claims or arguments in more depth or responding to the posts that they make to you. Keep the discussion on target and try to analyze things in as much detail as you can. Please answer in 100 words or more.

 After reading both Regan’s and Singer’s articles, I have determined that they both have the same overall view in regards to ethical treatment in animals; however, they are yet so different. Regan seems very emotional in his article whereas Singer seems to be a little less emotional, more open to facts and reality and a bit more utilitarian.

Regan leads off with his goals of which aim to end animal product testing, animal agricultural and ending sport hunting. In this sense, I agree, but maybe not as deeply and passionately as Regan does. Addressing two of his goals, I do not agree with the use of animals for product testing. As an avid dog lover and owner of two rescue dogs, I cannot agree with the use of animals, especially domesticated dogs that are bred for the use of product testing; however, I do understand the importance of why companies test products before releasing them to the public. While I don’t agree with the testing, I don’t have a perfect answer for an alternative at this time. Additionally, while I have hunted before for food, not for sport, I do believe there are some cases where sport hunting actually is done for the greater good. Take wild hog hunting, or coyote hunting for instance. Wild hogs and coyote overpopulation have been known to be bad for other species and vegetation, so by opening up these grounds for hunters to come and hunt, they are keeping the population under control and are protecting other species at the same time.

Singer seems to implement a bit more realism into his views when it comes to the perception of rights. For instance, he brings up women’s right to vote. He explains how women have a right to vote because they are capable of making rational and thought out decisions which enables and entitles them to vote. He then explains how dogs are incapable of understanding voting processes therefore they do not and cannot have the right to vote. I like this explanation because it really breaks down the differences of the two and how it depends on how you look at things.

References:

Regan, T. (1985). The case for animal rights. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals (pp. 13-26). New York: Basil Blackwell.

Singer, P. (1989). All animals are equal. In T. Regan & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal rights and human obligations (pp. 148-162). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.