Philosopher Peter Singer on Animal Equality

Professor of bioethics at Princeton University, Peter Singer, a recipient of Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics Center at the University of Melbourne, is considered one of the most influential philosophers in the world. In this video we interviewed at the Carnegie International Problem Ethics Committee held on Julia Taylor Kennedy on 6th October 2011 to see if humans are superior to animals and whether they are equivalent to animals and why It was.

Singer believes that they enjoy important equality in their abilities to enjoy human beings and animals suffering their lives. In this respect, we share moral equality with animals. He said, "I see it from the perspective of equality between humans and animals, in a very special sense, they have the common sense of equality, that is, the ability to afflict or enjoy life. I will oppose it because I do not want to ignore or ignore the suffering of animals but simply want to spread equality beyond the boundaries of seeds. Creatures should be considered equally, all creatures are interested, and everyone can feel pain regardless of their species just as human beings do not change. The kind of equality "

Singer said that he became vegetarian as he started thinking about the ethical problem of treating animals in our way and massacring them as food. He said, "I find a way to defend and prove that we have the right to deal with them in our way as we have the right to deal with them in our way We are unreasonable to handle animal feed and other uses, but we practice seedism and prejudice We believe that we are somewhat superior from human beings because we are human beings As a means to the end But there is no philosophical principle that allows you to think that only those (animals) are things. Clearly they are perceptual beings and suffer.

Philosopher Peter Singer reflected this concern in his book "Animation of animals". Among them, he believes that animals may suffer as much as humans and they believe that interest is equally worth considering. He believes that human beings are guilty of species prejudice. These ideas stimulated the movement of the rights of newborn animals. One such example is Chester Zoo, the staff covered a bridge connecting the habitat of Borneo Orangutan. Due to the threat of roads and village habitats by palm oil farms, the population of orangutans is increasingly isolated. The zoo is currently working on wildlife such as wildlife.

The opposition to animal experiments reappeared in the second half of the 20th century, especially after the announcement of animal liberation by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer (born 1946) in 1975. Singer provided a powerful philosophical basis for animal rights movement, and he used the animal's use in research - and food, clothing or other purposes - mainly in 1970 by racialism (created by Richard Rider In this case, animals are considered to have the lowest moral value among different species, and he believes that this moral value is only discrimination by race discrimination and sex. However, his argument does not arise from the premise that animals have inherent rights. Different as Utilitarians

Peter Singer is a philosopher and a Utilitarian of Australia, actively claiming the rights of animals and equality between species. He made conclusions about his articles such as "All animals equality", "famine, wealth, morality", "humans feel". These articles have different opinions, but they are interrelated, and at some point they are related to each other. These articles only insist on animal ethics and equality. In his article "Famine, Prosperity, and Moral", Singer advocates his idea of ​​morality, famine and wealth.