Alastair Norcross's Puppies, Pigs And Animals

301 Words2 Pages
Alastair Norcross points out that animal suffering is an inexcusable action which cannot be rationalized or explained. Through a variety of anecdotes, refuting arguments and rationalization, he condemns those who allow the continued pain of animals in Puppies, Pigs and People. He would certainly do the same in the case of the Vancouver Aquarium, which enjoys a host of sea creatures that are used for a variety of means. In this paper, I will examine his arguments and appeal to the doctrine of double effect in order to justify the use of dolphins and beluga whales for scientific research. Norcross begins his argument by detailing a gruesome story of a man who tortures and kills puppies for his personal means. This is analogous to the Vancouver
Show More
Related

  • Moral Basis Of Vegetarianism

    1554 Words  | 7 Pages

    Domestic Animals.” Journal of Animal Ethics, vol. 1, no. 1, 2011, pp. 46–57. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/janimalethics.1.1.0046. In the article "'Pets or Meat?' Ethics and Domestic Animals," Grace Clement addresses a topic that surfaces in the minds of many: are loveable house pets and the "meat" animals people consume one in the same? If so, why is it morally okay to eat the "meat" animals? Clement describes the similarities between a common household dog and farming pig. She also

    Read More

More about Alastair Norcross's Puppies, Pigs And Animals

Open Document