Research Paper on "Ethical Treatment of Animals"

Quoted Instructions for "Ethical Treatment of Animals" Assignment:

In this course, we look at classical ethical theories of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. We also look at the different kinds of perspectives on ethical issues introduced by relativism, ethical egoism, and emotivism.

For this paper, you will pick an ethical issue to discuss, but one that is not a specific topic addressed in our text (thus, gun control or product liability would not be possible choices). Some examples are given below, but it is recommended that you choose to write on a topic you have already encountered or you have thought about previously. (One way of thinking about this is to think of an ethical issue that either worries you or enrages you.)

Identify, specifically, the ethical issue and the ethical problems it presents. Drawing on various sources, explain how one of the classical theories (utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics) would resolve the problem. Then, contrast this response with the perspective brought to the issue by relativism, emotivism, or ethical egoism. Finally, state which of these views is closer to your own, supporting your response with a clearly-presented and well-supported argument. The more specific you can be the better, and feel free to include examples that will strengthen your account.

The Final Paper must be between eight to ten pages long, using at least five (5) resources Format your rough draft according to APA (6th edition) style and properly cite all your resources.If you would like to refer to APA samples and tutorials, log into the Ashford Writing Center (USER NAME: ashford; PASSWORD: student). Click on the ENG122***** tab and review the resources in the *****Week 5***** section.

Writing the Final Paper

The Final Paper:

Must be eight to ten double-spaced pages in length and formatted according to APA (6th edition) style as outlined in the approved APA style guide.

Must use at least five academic resources in addition to the required text, at least two of which are found in Ashford Online Library. Wikipedia is an example of a source that is NOT acceptable.

Must use APA style as outlined in the approved APA style guide to document all sources.

Must include a cover page that includes:

Title of Paper

Student*****s name

Course name and number

Instructor*****s name

Date submitted

Must include an introductory paragraph with a succinct thesis statement.

Must conclude with a restatement of the thesis and a conclusion paragraph.

Must include a Reference Page that is completed according to APA (6th edition) style as outlined in the approved APA style guide.

The issue of ethical treatment of animals is an important one and also one that many people are passionate about because it gives a voice to animals who are not capable of speaking for themselves. It is noble and right to be for the ethical treatment of animals. It is not enough, however, to merely be emotional; one must also understand why it is not just a passionate issue but why it is one that needs attention because it is not right to treat animals badly. Merely questioning the problem and asking one*****s self why they believe in the ethical treatment of animals makes the issue one that is subject to reasoning as opposed to emotion. In his book Animal Ethics, author Robert Garner (2005) says that, *****Animal ethics seeks to examine beliefs that are held about the moral status of non-human animals.***** Animal ethics can also be defined more generally by acknowledging that animal ethics is about acting for the moral good of animals by understanding animal-human moral issues through knowledge and cognitive reasoning. Using virtue ethics as a moral framework, this paper will examine how virtue ethics can help prevent the unethical treatment of animals.

Virtue ethics hold that one must act how a virtuous person would act and that one *****cannot isolate the making of ethical decisions from your personality***** (Panaman 2008.) a person who has good character will act accordingly. Good character can be defined (though is not limited to) qualities such as compassion, kindness, respect, toleration, courage, and honesty (2008). When one possesses these types of qualities, one is thus thought to be a virtuous person.

***** is the ancient philosopher believed to be the main theorist behind virtue ethics. He believed that virtue is the middle road between two vices, the middle of two spectrums ***** for example, courage is superior to fearlessness or cowardice (Animal ethics 2011). While later ethical theories (mainly ones with God at the forefront) took over the popularity of virtue ethics, virtue ethics theories came back in the 20th century and made it more modern (2008). The modern tradition of virtue ethics says that people should be virtuous in all aspects of their lives and this means that they must be a good person always.

When it comes to the issues of the ethical treatment of animals, virtue ethics can support ethical treatment because it forces people to ask: How will my actions support being a virtuous person? The morally right action comes from doing what one believes a virtuous person would do as opposed to other ethical theories that might make one do something out of obligation or duty, or what will get the best results (Panaman 2008). The main concern in virtue ethics becomes about a person*****s moral character. When people choose to develop their moral character, better virtues will be created, and thus there will be more people acting in virtuous ways in all aspects of their lives ***** and this includes how they treat animals.

One example to be considered when thinking about how a person with a strong sense of virtue might behave is to counter it with how a person with a strong sense of duty might behave. From a duty sense, if one were a livestock farmer, he or she might believe that his or her duty lies in what is best for the people because, after all, the job is about raising livestock for slaughter, which will then become food for people. Therefore, the first duty would be to humans and the second duty to animals (Panaman 2008) (which may entail being as good to the animals as possible while they are in his or her care on the farm ***** i.e., not allowing torture, giving them adequate living space, feeding them food that is good for them, etc.). with virtue ethics, however, one will apply reason, experience and logic as well as emotional abilities like beliefs, faith, etc. in order to act how a virtuous person should act (Panaman 2008). A person who believes in virtue ethics would think that as a person one should be kind and compassionate to all living things. Therefore, one should not cause the suffering of animals. As a livestock farmer, the person would probably find that he or she is in the wrong profession as it goes against what he or she believes is virtuous and right.

Virtue ethics could encourage the more ethical treatment of animals because it forces one to think in terms of kindness, compassion, and fairness. It doesn*****t bring up issues such as duty or what is better for the most people. Surely if one were to look at the issue of the ethical treatment of animals from a virtue ethics perspective, any sort of unfair or unethical treatment would be considered morally and ethically wrong.

Ethical relativism holds that there are not any moral truths; this is, all ethical viewpoints are equally valid and the individual is the only one who can determine what is true and relative for him or her. Moral relativism is not uncommon. People often say just because that*****s right for them doesn*****t make it right for me, but they may still hold that the viewpoint is valid. Ethical egoism holds that people are generally selfish; that it, each person has one ultimate aim: his or her own welfare. Ethical emotivism, on the other hand, more of a meta-ethical theory, argues that a moral claim (This is not moral or That is moral) isn*****t a statement about the action itself or about the person saying it. It*****s merely a raw expression of emotion ***** just like an emotional reaction to pain (e.g., a scream, a cry, etc.).

When it comes to the ethical treatment of animals, ethical emotivism is the theory that is often used to prevent the unethical treatment of animals. C.L. Stevenson (1944) who wrote the book Ethics and Language argues that these moral statements aren*****t just expressions of emotions but they are attempts to get other people to share the same emotional reaction that a person is having. When animal activists use images of animals being tested on, slaughtered animals, or images of the consequences of dog fighting, they are tying to get others to react in horror at the images that elicited that horrific response in them.

In dealing with the issue of the ethical treatment of animals, there are some who take an ethical relativism approach; that is, there are some who choose to eat meat, wear leather shoes, and buy products that have knowingly been tested on animals. They may believe that these things are common in our society and if others don*****t like it, well, they don*****t have to do it. That is, I may not want to eat meat, but that doesn*****t mean that I think it is wrong for you to eat meat. I choose to wear leather shoes and carry a leather purse or wear furs, but that doesn*****t mean that I think if others don*****t want to it is silly. It is all relative. Some may take ethical egoism approach and decide that their enjoyment of life is more important than the ethical treatment of animals.

Virtue ethics is more along the lines of how I see the world and issues related to the ethical treatment of animals. I tend to be guided by ethical emotivism as the topic inspires me to do things in order to give these animals a voice. I am horrified by people who hurt animals and who don*****t think that it is wrong. I don*****t have an ethical relativism viewpoint about animal issues. I don*****t think that anyone should hurt animals for any reason. I think that a lot of theories are created in order for people to feel better about what they do. Emotivism is the real thing because it inspires a true and real feeling that has to do with innately or inherently what we know to be right or wrong. While there is the theory that people are only out for their own welfare (ethical egoism), I think that this is merely because some people are not inspired or cognitive enough to contemplate the ethical ponderings of issues such as animal cruelty. I believe that people are inherently good and if they were to follow their core beliefs, the emotional beliefs that come from within, there would be a lot more goodness in the world and there wouldn*****t be unethical treatment of animals.

References

Garner, R. (2005). Animal ethics. Polity.

Panaman, R (2008). *****How to do animal rights ***** and win the war on animals. Animal

Ethics.org. *****Chapter 2: Know your animal ethics & animal rights.***** Accessed on March 20, 2011 : http://www.animalethics.org.uk/i-ch2-1-animalethics.html

Stevenson, C.L. (1944). Ethics and language. Yale University Press.

*****