Time remaining:
Why are singers arguments hard to criticize?

Philosophy
Tutor: None Selected Time limit: 0 Hours

paper 1: "All Animals are Equal" by Peter Singer and paper 2: "The Case for Animal Rights" by Tom Regan. I am writing on a position paper how Singer has better reasons than Regan. I need more examples and reasons why Singer is more correct. 

Dec 14th, 2014

They appeal to logic, common sense and self-interest

1. Animals have feelings and should be well treated - everyone would agree with that

2. Animals are not as important as humans because them because they cannot see into the future and have nothing much to lose by dying compared to a human....again common sense

3. There is no moral requirement not to eat them. 

This is a utilitarian argument and since most of us want to eat animal meat, it is appealing.

Dec 15th, 2014

Studypool's Notebank makes it easy to buy and sell old notes, study guides, reviews, etc.
Click to visit
The Notebank
...
Dec 14th, 2014
...
Dec 14th, 2014
Dec 7th, 2016
check_circle
Mark as Final Answer
check_circle
Unmark as Final Answer
check_circle
Final Answer

Secure Information

Content will be erased after question is completed.

check_circle
Final Answer