Pros And Cons Of Deontology

1893 Words8 Pages
While not all animals are able to meet Warren’s five criteria, the animal community as a whole is able to. All animals meet Warren’s first criteria of consciousness because of their capacity to feel both pain and pleasure. Some animals such as crows, monkeys, gorillas, and even dogs are able to reason by solving simple or mildly complex puzzles. One study published by the Zoological Society of London suggests that some chimpanzees enjoy puzzles that are similar to human crossword puzzles “for the thrill of it”. ZSL researcher Fay Clark states, “That their research said chimpanzees can be motivated by more than just food. They noticed that the chimps were keen to complete the puzzle regardless of whether or not they receive a food reward. This…show more content…
Deontology is the non-consequentialist theory that, as opposed to utilitarianism, puts a heavy focus on the actions being taken and not the outcomes. Immanuel Kant, deontological philosopher, “argues that the “highest good” must be both intrinsically good, and good without qualification. He concluded that there is only one thing that is truly good: a good will, chosen out of a feeling of moral duty (Mastin). Since the right to make a moral decision is given to those who have the capacity for it, a deontologist can conclude that animals do not deserve the same moral rights that are given to humans. In other words, since animals have no moral distinguishability between right and wrong, a deontologist would claim that an animal should not have moral rights. The largest counter argument against animal rights is through the sense of rationality. While it has been proven that animals maintain some sense of rationality, a deontologist would argue that it is in comparable to that of a human’s rationality. Animals cannot rationalize based on a given situation, and, instead, act upon natural instincts. When humans are presented with a moral dilemma, they must rationalize between what the morally right and wrong actions would need to be taken. Even though this is still difficult for humans to do, regardless, we have the capacity…show more content…
Thousands of animals are killed for sport, millions are held in poor living conditions before slaughter, and others are treated like garbage by owners and beaten and tortured. One issue event that holds a lot of controversy with animal rights activists is the annual New Jersey bear hunt. New Jersey passed a law on March 10, 2010 named the Comprehensive Black Bear Management Plan (CBBMP) which allows for hunters to hunt black bears for a specific period of time during the fall and winter hunting season. These plans were implemented in order to maintain control of the black bear population that has been causing issues to New Jersey residents. Due to the high amounts of complaints pertaining to black bear destruction of property, the New Jersey Council decided to pass a law allowing residential hunters to kill a portion of the bear population in order to lower their overall numbers, and hopefully reducing the number of black bear incidents. According to the New Jersey Fish and Game Council (FGC) report, “A total of 10,093 records were countered. 9,327 comments opposed the bear hunt, compared to 766 comments in favor of the hunt. This means that 92.4% opposed the plan while only 7.6% were in favor.” (Metler). Regardless of the overwhelming number of citizens against the plan, the hunt continued this year, and even had an extended period that allowed hunters more time to hunt. This year, the

More about Pros And Cons Of Deontology

Open Document