Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think

Conventional wisdom of the crowd often cites the pains and woes of animals being grossly mistreated by humans. Therefore, there exist many proponents, both professional and amateur, that support the advocation of greater animal rights. This paper seeks to flip this paradigm. Following from the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Chuan, Darren De Ren
Other Authors: Olav Benjamin Vassend
Format: Final Year Project (FYP)
Language:English
Published: Nanyang Technological University 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156144
_version_ 1824454610830491648
author Chuan, Darren De Ren
author2 Olav Benjamin Vassend
author_facet Olav Benjamin Vassend
Chuan, Darren De Ren
author_sort Chuan, Darren De Ren
collection NTU
description Conventional wisdom of the crowd often cites the pains and woes of animals being grossly mistreated by humans. Therefore, there exist many proponents, both professional and amateur, that support the advocation of greater animal rights. This paper seeks to flip this paradigm. Following from the analysis of famous animal rights philosophers such as Peter Singer and Immanuel Kant, this essay aims to break down conventional arguments for animal rights and show how our morality is compromised if we choose to afford animals with rights. At the end of the evaluation, this paper maintains that human nature disallows us from affording animals with rights, but that this conclusion does not preclude humans from treating animals better.
first_indexed 2025-02-19T03:25:03Z
format Final Year Project (FYP)
id ntu-10356/156144
institution Nanyang Technological University
language English
last_indexed 2025-02-19T03:25:03Z
publishDate 2022
publisher Nanyang Technological University
record_format dspace
spelling ntu-10356/1561442023-03-11T20:12:01Z Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think Chuan, Darren De Ren Olav Benjamin Vassend School of Humanities vassend@ntu.edu.sg Humanities::Ethics Humanities::Philosophy Conventional wisdom of the crowd often cites the pains and woes of animals being grossly mistreated by humans. Therefore, there exist many proponents, both professional and amateur, that support the advocation of greater animal rights. This paper seeks to flip this paradigm. Following from the analysis of famous animal rights philosophers such as Peter Singer and Immanuel Kant, this essay aims to break down conventional arguments for animal rights and show how our morality is compromised if we choose to afford animals with rights. At the end of the evaluation, this paper maintains that human nature disallows us from affording animals with rights, but that this conclusion does not preclude humans from treating animals better. Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy 2022-04-05T06:51:12Z 2022-04-05T06:51:12Z 2022 Final Year Project (FYP) Chuan, D. D. R. (2022). Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think. Final Year Project (FYP), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156144 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156144 en application/pdf Nanyang Technological University
spellingShingle Humanities::Ethics
Humanities::Philosophy
Chuan, Darren De Ren
Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title_full Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title_fullStr Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title_full_unstemmed Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title_short Why fighting for animal rights isn't as ethically justifiable as we might think
title_sort why fighting for animal rights isn t as ethically justifiable as we might think
topic Humanities::Ethics
Humanities::Philosophy
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156144
work_keys_str_mv AT chuandarrenderen whyfightingforanimalrightsisntasethicallyjustifiableaswemightthink