I have to write a paper over an ethics topic. And I chose: Where do animals belong in the moral community? Should animals be seen as only having instrumental worth to humans, or do animals have some intrinsic worth? Should they be given any rights? Is it speciesist to give preferential treatment to humans over non-human animals?
I need a thesis and some good ideas. I'm not the best at writing papers so any help would be great. I've already looked at websites for this and they confuse me still. So any one on one help would be greatly appreciated.
thank you.
You first need to decide which side of this animal topic you favor.
We'll be glad to help you further, once you tell us your feelings about this issue.
Ok. Thank you.
So far I'm at the fact that animals do not have any rights, but that they are protected under our laws against abuse and neglect. They should not be given any rights because even though they are sentient intelligent beings, they do not have the human thought process. Animals have both insrumental worth (such as livestock) but also intrinsic worth because they're not just tools. They're living breathing beings that deserve our respect.
You have excellent thoughts on this subject!
Most sources define the moral community as a human community. Therefore animals are not part of this community.
Your thesis statement could be as simple as: "Animals are not part of the moral community."
Then outline your arguments to support your thesis.
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS321&q=moral+community&aq=f&oq=
oh also, that i don't believe in animal rights, so much as I believe in animal wellfare.
I'm curious, how are animals not part of the moral community, when they are a part of the human community and interact with us on a daily basis?
My view is that only humans are part of the moral community because only humans have morals. Animals don't have the power to be moral. They can only act on instinct.
We humans have the moral responsibility to care for other living beings.
Writing a paper on ethics can be challenging, but I'm here to help you develop a strong thesis and provide some ideas for your paper on where animals belong in the moral community. When approaching this topic, it's important to consider different perspectives, arguments, and ethical theories.
Thesis Statement:
"Animals belong in the moral community and should be recognized as having intrinsic worth, deserving of ethical consideration and some level of rights, challenging the notion of instrumental worth and questioning speciesism."
Now, let's break down your thesis and explore some ideas to support it:
1. Start with defining key terms and concepts:
a. Moral community: Explain the concept of moral community, which generally refers to the boundaries of ethical consideration and the beings who are included or excluded.
b. Instrumental worth: Discuss the perspective that sees animals as valuable only for their usefulness or benefits to humans.
c. Intrinsic worth: Explore the perspective that recognizes animals as intrinsically valuable, meaning they have worth in and of themselves, regardless of their usefulness to humans.
d. Rights: Examine the debate around whether animals should be granted certain rights, such as the right to life, freedom from unnecessary suffering, or freedom from exploitation.
e. Speciesism: Define speciesism, which is the belief in the inherent superiority of one species over another and the assignment of different values and rights based on species membership.
2. Present arguments for animals having intrinsic worth and deserving ethical consideration:
a. Sentience and consciousness: Highlight that animals are sentient beings capable of experiencing pleasure, pain, and a range of emotions, which warrants moral consideration.
b. Similarities to humans: Discuss the biological, cognitive, and emotional similarities between humans and animals that suggest their inherent worth and deserving of ethical consideration.
c. Ecological interconnectedness: Emphasize the importance of recognizing animals' value in maintaining ecological balance and preserving biodiversity.
3. Argue against the perspective of animals having only instrumental worth:
a. Critique anthropocentrism: Highlight the flaws in anthropocentrism, which places undue importance on human interests and disregards the interests of non-human animals based solely on their instrumental value to humans.
b. Ethical implications: Discuss the ethical consequences of reducing animals' worth to mere utilities (e.g., animal exploitation for food, entertainment, or scientific research).
4. Analyze the concept of rights for animals:
a. Utilitarian perspective: Examine the utilitarian argument for animal rights, which asserts that recognizing animals' rights can lead to overall human and non-human happiness and well-being.
b. Animal liberation: Discuss the animal rights perspective that argues for extending certain rights and protections to animals to prevent unnecessary suffering and exploitation.
5. Reflect on potential counterarguments:
a. Religious and cultural beliefs: Acknowledge that diverse religious and cultural beliefs may affect people's views on animal worth and rights.
b. Practicality and feasibility: Address potential challenges or critiques related to implementing and enforcing animal rights.
Remember to support each of your arguments with evidence, examples, and ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, to strengthen your position.
It's always a good idea to consult academic resources, such as books, scholarly articles, and peer-reviewed journals, to find supporting evidence and counterarguments for a well-rounded paper. Additionally, consider discussing your topic and ideas with your instructor or classmates for further guidance and feedback. Good luck with your paper!