Animal Liberation. The liberation of the animals

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Animal Liberation. The Liberation of Animals (Original: Animal Liberation ) is the title of the book by Peter Singer, first published in 1975 . It encompasses both the ethical concepts of preferential utilitarian animal ethics , that is, questions about the harm or benefit of an action or omission, as well as the description of the situation of animals in intensive animal husbandry and animal experiments .

The book, which has sold over half a million times and has been translated many times, contributed to the emergence of a modern animal rights movement . On the one hand it has been attacked sharply inside and outside of animal rights theory and on the other hand is considered a classic of ethical and political literature on the relationships between humans and non-human animals. Singer has written further texts on the ethics of the human-animal relationship since the publication, but in current interviews (as of 2011) he continues to refer to Animal Liberation as an “adequate representation” of his position, which does not require any fundamental clarification.

content

In the book, Peter Singer explains his animal ethics and the associated practical effects. His position is the result of his utilitarian ethics and reflections on equality ; he distances himself from animal lovers who act out of love for animals . He also distinguishes himself from radical currents in the animal rights movement, which see violence against people to free animals as a legitimate means.

The book explains some basic philosophical principles at the beginning. It is simply written and is also aimed at readers with no prior knowledge. Four years after Animal Liberation was published, Singer published his major work, Practical Ethics , which is more aimed at an academic audience.

Ethical foundation

At the beginning of the chapter All Animals Are Equal, Singer asks what “equality” is. The factual, i.e. H. This does not mean biological equality between people, since people are obviously different. Equality also does not mean treating different people in the same way, as their needs are different. For example, there would be no point in giving men the right to an abortion just because women have this right (under certain conditions). Likewise, according to Singer, a society would be unfair in which every individual is valued according to a certain quality (such as intelligence or rationality) and, depending on the expression of this quality, becomes a ruler or a ruled.

For Singer, equality does not mean treating individuals with similar traits equally (the type of treatment and trait being arbitrary), but rather equal consideration of interests . With this basis, an opponent of racism is no longer dependent on the factual assertion of equality of races in characteristics such as intelligence and empathy , but can reject racism, as there can be no ethically relevant reason for it, the principle of equal consideration not to all races because: "Equality is a moral concept and not a statement of fact."

However, according to Singer, the principle of equal consideration of interests can be applied not only to the races of humans, but also to the species . Analogous to racism, Singer speaks of “ speciesism ” when the interests of other species are not taken into account . In his view, there is no ethically relevant reason not to extend equality to non-human animals. To clarify the question of which animals have to be considered at all, he quotes Jeremy Bentham :

“What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as more conversable animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month old. But suppose they were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason ?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer ? "

“Otherwise, why should the insurmountable border lie right here? Is it the ability to think or maybe the ability to speak? But a fully grown horse or dog are incomparably more sensible and communicative animals than a day, week, or even a month old baby. But assuming this wasn't the case, what would that matter? The question is not Can you think? or can you talk? but can you suffer? . "

- Jeremy Bentham : An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789)

Singer admits that one cannot be certain that nonhuman animals can experience pain. However, one can never be sure about the pain sensation of other living beings anyway, since this can only be experienced from the first-person perspective. Singer argues, however, that the assumption that a dog or similarly developed living being can feel pain is just as reasonable as the assumption that other people have this quality. In addition to the observable behavior in the event of pain, such as uttering loud sounds or trying to escape, he also points out the very similar nervous system that is not present in plants, for example.

Singer regards the ability to feel pain as a prerequisite for having interests. Since he believes that many non-human animals (such as most mammals and birds) have this ability, their interests must also be taken into account. Singer notes, however, that his position on different values ​​of living things is not speciesist. When asked in which cases the killing of living things is morally reprehensible, Singer does not give a definitive answer.

Animal testing

In the Tools for Research chapter , Singer describes an example of speciesism, namely the use of animals for research. Here it becomes particularly clear how similar humans and animals are usually considered, since animal experiments should usually be inferred from the behavior or reactions of animals to human reactions. Singer criticizes animal experiments such as a 1982 experiment at Brooks City Base ( United States Air Force ), in which the influence of chemical weapons and ionizing radiation on the ability of monkeys to operate a joystick was examined. According to Singer, many state and non-state experiments cause great suffering in the animals used, of which society is hardly aware.

In addition to animal experiments by the military, Singer also criticizes experiments in university operations, for example in the field of psychology, such as an experiment in which a dummy mother was used to investigate the behavior of baby monkeys. As soon as the baby monkey clung to the supposed mother, it became a "monster" with spikes, with the baby monkey clinging even more tightly to the dummy mother in fear. From the experiment, the psychologist Harry Harlow concluded that when children are very frightened, they seek refuge in their mother, even if this triggers the fear.

Singer states that the interests of the animals are not taken into account in these experiments, and that, in his opinion of equality, such animal experiments should not have been carried out, since the benefit provided is disproportionate to the suffering suffered. Because there is often a very dubious or no benefit at all against the very certainly existing great suffering of the animals. However, Singer does not reject animal experiments in principle, advocates of animal experiments argue that an experiment that costs a monkey the life while saving the lives of a thousand people is morally required. This also corresponds to Singer's utilitarian approach, but he argues that in practice many animal experiments have no direct benefit for humans and should therefore be abolished. According to Singer, the lethal dose or the Draize test have little informative value for the harmfulness for humans, and can also be partially replaced by experiments on cell cultures .

Nevertheless, there may be animal experiments, for example in the development of drugs, which are of great benefit to humanity. In order to answer the question of which experiments may be carried out, one has to ask oneself whether the experiment would also be carried out with a human, mentally handicapped infant (preferably an orphan). Because such a child is on the same spiritual level as an animal, and it would be speciesist to accept the experiment with animals but reject it with mentally handicapped orphans.

Use of animals for food production

In the third chapter In the Animal Factory , Singer addresses the situation of animals that are reared for food in factory farming . The number of animals killed annually, primarily for meat, egg and milk production, is estimated at several tens of billions. Most animals are raised and slaughtered in industrial agriculture , in which the ultimate goal is to maximize profit and not to avoid animal suffering, a natural production method, healthy and strong animals, etc. As Singer admits, the farmers are definitely interested in healthy animals, but it is often cheaper for them to accept a certain death rate than to take costly measures to prevent premature death. For example, it is cheaper to keep lots of chickens in a small space and suffer some deaths from stress and illness than it is to give each chicken more space. The unnatural living conditions also give rise to problems that - as Singer criticizes - should be stopped by even more unnatural countermeasures. For example, stress-pecking is common in chickens, where chickens injure each other with their bills. To prevent this, the chickens have their beaks shortened, which can cause them severe pain.

Singer also goes into the various animal species and their living conditions in factory farming. In particular, he criticizes the cramped housing, which does not allow birds (e.g. broilers or laying hens) to extend their wings and does not allow pigs to turn around or to exercise in any way. In calf rearing , iron-free food is used to preserve the pale color of the meat, and the calves are not allowed to move. Singer sees the main suffering of the animals in their rearing and housing and not so much in the transport and slaughter (which is now often carried out under anesthesia).

Singer criticizes, among other things, British and US animal welfare legislation . Although important principles for the treatment of animals are laid down there, these regulations do not apply to animals that are kept for food purposes. The recommendations of the so-called Brambell Committee to respect five basic freedoms of animals (namely to turn around, lick, stand up, lie down and be able to stretch all limbs) were hardly taken into account in the legislation. In the second edition of Animal Liberation , published in 1990, Singer states that there has been little improvement since the first edition. Only in Sweden has animal welfare made great strides, even if the legislation is still speciesist , as the interests of animals and humans are still not taken into account equally.

vegetarianism

In the chapter The decision for a vegetarian way of life , Singer calls on the reader to vegetarianism , which he derives from his ethical principles and the situation of animals in factory farming. In his opinion, animals are being misused as a means to an end and their interests are not immediately taken into account. A protest against animal husbandry has to be supported by a vegetarian way of life in order not to lose credibility. Vegetarianism is a form of boycott that has two effects: firstly, there is the chance to bring about political changes that will strengthen animal welfare laws; secondly, it directly reduces suffering by keeping fewer animals for meat production due to the falling demand for meat ( Supply and demand ). Singer emphasizes that it is not about the animals that have already died, but about reducing animal production in the long term. Buying and consuming meat supports the producers, so even the hypothetical possibility of painless rearing is of no use, since the question “ is it right to eat meat? "Reads, but" is it right to eat this meat? "

In addition to arguments based on animal ethics, Singer also lists a number of other reasons for a vegetarian lifestyle. Meat production contributes to climate change (since animal food production is inefficient), leads to deforestation and pollutes the environment, and vegetarianism is a healthier alternative to meat consumption. His minimum requirement for the reader is the renunciation of meat and eggs from animals from factory farming.

Historical review

In the chapter The Rule of Humans , Singer gives an overview of the historical attitude of humans towards animals, in which he sees the reason for the current relationship between humans and non-human animals. In addition to the ancient philosophers, religions in particular shaped the image of animals. Singer quotes Thomas Aquinas , who saw the killing of animals for food as part of the "divine order" because it was necessary and thus justified. Singer names Francis of Assisi as one of the advocates of animal rights in Christian history . The mechanistic image of animals as soulless automatons by René Descartes was criticized by Voltaire , who relied on the similar structure of humans and animals. David Hume called for a “considerate use” of animals, but Immanuel Kant saw no obligation towards animals because animals, unlike humans, are not there for their own sake, but only as a means. In 1780 Jeremy Bentham published his book Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation , in which he established the ability to suffer as the decisive criterion for considering animals. Bentham is therefore one of the first advocates of animal rights. Those moral philosophers who demanded equality of animals were strengthened, among other things, by Darwin's theory of evolution , which not only showed a relationship between humans and non-human animals, but also cleared up the mistake that the killing of animals is necessary for one's own survival.

Painting on the first indictment of cruelty to animals

In addition to the philosophical concepts about the status of animals, there were also a number of legislative proposals designed to prevent cruelty towards animals. In 1822 a bill initiated by Richard Martin became the first animal welfare law, the "Martin's Act". Further laws followed, but as Singer sums up in the following chapter, animal welfare has not yet prevailed.

Current situation

After Singer has explained the historical relationship between humans and animals, he goes into the “ Speciesism Today ” chapter on the “current” situation and some objections to animal rights. He criticizes the low social and media attention for the topic as well as the lack of information about the situation of animals: for example, children are still given the image of a traditional farm; many are therefore not aware of factual conditions in intensive animal husbandry. This is partly due to the fact that many people do not want to deal with animal rights in order not to have to critically question their own behavior.

Singer sees the confusion between animal rights activists and animal lovers, who only demand animal protection in a weakened form and in some cases only for some animals, as a problem in the animal rights movement. Instead of concentrating on the big problem areas such as factory farming, there are animal welfare organizations that rely on marginal areas of cruelty to animals (e.g. baby seals) and, according to Singer, give society the reassuring feeling that something is for the animals will be done. Large parts of the modern animal rights movement are trying to reverse this development and distance themselves from “emotionally” motivated animal rights activists.

In addition to describing the current situation, Singer replies to a number of counter-arguments that are frequently made about the equal consideration of the interests of animals. Singer rejects the accusation that animal rights activists care less about humans than animals and that humans have to come first. In his view, a preference for humans or non-human animals when considering interests would be speciesist and thus wrong. He also points out that animal rights activists often campaign for human rights, such as Jeremy Bentham for children's rights .

Great Ape Project and Appendix

In the last chapter Singer describes briefly he co-founded Great Ape Project , the basic rights for apes calls.

In the appendices he lists further literature, contact addresses and animal rights organizations.

reception

Animal Liberation. The liberation of animals is considered a classic in the field of animal rights , which founded a modern animal rights movement.

The book, which has been sold over half a million times and has been translated many times, helped the animal rights movement to gain popularity and is therefore also known as the "Bible of the animal liberation movement".

criticism

Singer's ethics have been criticized for their drastic conclusions. In particular, his views on abortion, euthanasia, and infanticide are controversial, but are discussed in Animal Liberation. The liberation of the animals are not discussed (see practical ethics ). His theses on animal ethics are less known in German-speaking countries. Criticism comes from the churches, for example Cardinal Meisner criticized the fact that Singer regards certain nonhuman animals as being of equal value or even of higher value than some people. Helmut F. Kaplan tried to counteract a mixture between Singer's views on euthanasia and the animal rights movement in order to avoid the impression that animal rights activists are in favor of saving animals at the expense of children and disabled people.

On the part of the animal rights movement, Singer's attitude towards animal experiments has been criticized because he does not reject them in principle, but in some (and as he emphasizes) rare cases, regards them as justified and morally necessary.

In his book The Moral Status of Animals, Andreas Flury criticizes Singer's substitutability argument, i.e. his thesis that sentient non-persons can be killed if they are replaced by another, similar being. He also doubts that Singer applies the principle of equal balancing of interests to its full extent: Singer's criticism is directed against the cruel methods of pest control without asking himself the question of the legitimacy of a reduction in so-called pests. Flury suspects that Singer - contrary to the principle of equal balancing of interests - allows humans to enforce non-trivial interests over non-trivial interests of animals, otherwise radical changes in lifestyle (e.g. a reduction in the number of people instead of pests) follow would have to. Flury also refers to the criticism of utilitarianism , which also applies to Singer's variant of preferential utilitarianism . This also includes the criticism of incommensurability , i.e. H. lack of opportunities for comparison and weighing up, which is even more problematic in preferential utilitarianism. It is not only difficult to compare classic-utilitarian interests with one another, but in particular to find a way to weigh up between classic-utilitarian and preferential-utilitarian (future-oriented) preferences and the non-utilitarian value of people's autonomy.

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Giovanni Aloi: Beyond Animal Liberation . In: Antennae: Animal Wrongs and Rights , 2011, pp. 9-14. Archived from the original on October 4, 2012. 
  2. ^ A b Charles R. Magel: Keyguide to information sources in animal rights ; McFarland; Jefferson, NC 1988, p. 103
  3. ↑ An exact number cannot be determined, the food and agriculture organization assumes around 56 billion (PDF; 515 kB) without including “marine animals”. These are only recorded in weight information. On the basis of this database, fishcound.org.uk estimates that around 1-3 trillion marine animals are affected.
  4. ^ Full English text of Martin's Act 1822
  5. ^ Quote from Newsweek at Amazon
  6. ↑ a b Article about Peter Singer at Spiegel Online
  7. ↑ Practical Ethics . 2nd Edition. Reclam, Stuttgart 1993, ISBN 3-15-008033-9 . P. 437
  8. ↑ 'Atheism today can literally cost many people their lives'
  9. ↑ Essay ( Memento of August 29, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) as part of a special edition ( Memento of August 28, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) of the journal Enlightenment and Criticism about Peter Singer, 1995
  10. ^ Monkey business , Greg Neale, The Independent , December 3, 2006
  11. ↑ Andreas Flury: The moral status of animals , Alber, 1999, ISBN 3495478795 . P. 136 ff

From Animal Liberation. The Liberation of Animals , second edition, Rowohlt Verlag 1996:

  1. ↑ p. 19
  2. ↑ p. 9 and text on the cover
  3. ↑ pp. 22-24
  4. ↑ p. 15, p. 21
  5. ↑ p. 28
  6. ↑ p. 31
  7. ↑ p. 29, p. 31
  8. ↑ p. 32
  9. ↑ p. 35f
  10. ↑ p. 46
  11. ↑ p. 54
  12. ↑ p. 56
  13. ↑ p. 63
  14. ↑ p. 69
  15. ↑ p. 71ff
  16. ↑ p. 83
  17. ↑ p. 137
  18. ↑ p. 104ff
  19. ↑ p. 138
  20. ↑ p. 176, 196
  21. ↑ p. 174, 194ff
  22. ↑ p. 208
  23. ↑ p. 217
  24. ↑ p. 236
  25. ↑ p. 186
  26. ↑ p. 229ff
  27. ↑ p. 228ff
  28. ↑ p. 260ff
  29. ↑ p. 265f
  30. ↑ p. 261
  31. ↑ p. 268ff
  32. ↑ p. 290
  33. ↑ p. 312
  34. ↑ pp. 312, 323
  35. ↑ p. 324ff
  36. ↑ p. 333
  37. ↑ p. 346ff
  38. ↑ p. 350ff
  39. ↑ p. 354ff
  40. ↑ p. 17

Remarks:

  1. ↑ Singer uses the term "non-human animal" for all animals except humans. For him, humans belong to the group of animals because of their evolutionary relationship.
  2. ↑ This question is answered in detail by him in Practical Ethics .
  3. ↑ Some philosophers hold that, although a child is on the same spiritual level as an animal, it is fundamentally different from the animal in that it has the opportunity to develop. In order not to have to consider this possibility, Singer assumes mentally handicapped children who can never exceed the mental level of a non-human animal.
  4. ↑ Singer assumes orphans in his thought experiments in order to be able to ignore a possible emotional bond between the infant and the parents.
  5. ↑ Singer speaks of a "more humane form of speciesism" (p. 232)