Michael W. Jackson
A02-92-6779
Warren 11B
17 March 2000
dilemma that humanity faces today concerns the extent of moral consideration.
The question is then posed: should animals receive consideration equal to that of
humanity and with, this equal consideration should practices such as animal
acknowledge the basic idea of "survival of the fittest" and the benefits of animal
experimentation. The survival of the species is the direct concern of all animals, be
morally progressive wishes to elevate itself above the other animals and in turn
disregard the natural law of survival. With this regard a minority of the population
feel that the benefits of animal experimentation in no way outweigh the pain and
suffering incurred by the lab animals. Though the loss of animal life is terrible, the
loss of millions, thousands or even one human life is more deplorable if science and
disabling infliction that causes tremors and mental impairment which effects over
one million people in the United States. The treatment for Parkinson's until 1989
JACKSON 2
was L-dopa, which was unable to stop the advancement of the disease and could
increase the severity of the tremors. With the aide of animal experimentation a new
drug has been approved called deprenyl which slows the progression of
Parkinson's disease (Langley 50). The field of animal experimentation has led to
continued survival of man. It is unfortunate that any being had to suffer in the name
of medicine, but in the greater scheme of things, these animals have provided a
that one needs to maintain concern with unwarranted experimentation. The classic
example is cosmetic research. Though the industry states that the research is only
for product safety concerns many find this research frivolous. The occurrence of
cosmetic testing has decreased significantly in recent years (87%) due to the
negative press associated with such endeavors (MRMC 1). A second area of
useless experimentation occurred with reference to the link between smoking and
lung cancer. The link between lung cancer and smoking was observed in humans
and it was decided to refer these findings to the field of animal experimentation.
When the experiment was then conducted with animal subjects the link was not
evident. Because the laboratory did not yield conclusive results the move to
educate humans about the harmful effects of smoking was delayed many years (2).
This is often the case with carcinogenic compounds and animal models that cannot
reproduce the human reaction and in turn wounds the progression of science.
These examples should however not tarnish the beneficial research produced
Singer uses the Utilitarian approach to the world to dictate a need to extend equal
consideration to animals on the basis of suffering. The principle behind this claim is
that in the Utilitarian approach to life, the goals of society should be to promote the
greatest pleasure or cause the least pain (Rachels 103). Based upon the structure
of a utilitarian society Singer feels that the ability to suffer leads to equal
consideration of animals. Singer bases his argument on the fact that animals can
feel pain and suffer equal to that of humans. The Singer approach is probably the
most significant form of the debate over the rights of animals. The focus of the
debate concerns itself with the conflicting ideas that one either uses animals for
benefit or one grants equal consideration to animals and in turn does not use them
as means to an end (i.e. find a vaccine through experimentation) but treats them as
equals. Singer in his approach however neglects many hidden weaknesses that
The argument against animal testing is understandable, but not truly justified.
The first significant issue not addressed by Singer is the extent to which the new
level of consideration should apply to all forms of life. If the capacity to suffer would
should run its course to the outmost reaches of the animal kingdom. This would
include such entities as bacteria, which most of humanity would find absurd and not
readily acceptable. Singer, in further review of his work, does not address the field
JACKSON 4
of insects, as the insect is an entity that in the moral mindscape of humanity does
not maintain a level of significance with regards to that of a dog, cat, or monkey.
This neglect for a possible addition to humanity's moral perspective lends itself to a
concerns over a humans he fails by neglecting insects. Singer further weakens his
argument when he states that there is no need to interrupt the cycle of nature and
end the fighting amongst the animals as it is just a cycle in the circle of life. Singer
repeats this idea, as he never states in his work that it is wrong to kill an animal, as
it may always become necessary through self-preservation to end the life of another
The final avenue of support to the position that natural law must reign
supreme is found in the evidence gathered by Darwin and his overall statement that
evolution is the survival of the fittest. Through the research of Darwin it is possible
to observe the process of natural selection. The laws of nature dictate that an
organism will survive if it is able to adapt readily to its environment. The process of
evidence to the inherent process of nature and of life itself. Humanity has followed
this natural law throughout time and has adapted to many climates and regions of
the earth. Humanity, however, in its interest to become greater than the animals,
desires to leave its ancestral roots and instincts of survival in hopes of becoming a
pure society. If humanity were to leave behind its natural instincts, inherent in
basic animal survival, evolution itself would remove humanity from the earth as it
JACKSON 5
outcome of the process of evolution that if one species forgets the nature of life and
forget the past and with a removal of the past comes an end upon itself. The
human goal to bring equal consideration to animals and to end the experimentation
and overall use of animals is one that goes against the laws of nature. This position
review of the Darwinian principles of survival. The way to return society to a pre-
nomadic state. This return to the past would right the process of nature in all
respects, as society would again have to hunt and survive in nature to a greater
degree than today. It would be foolish for society to ignore technology and the
possibility of new treatment for millions in the name of animals that can be easily
bred in a laboratory and today even cloned. Those that believe animals are
equivalent to humans in spirit and worth are not forced to take the medicines that
vivisection has produced. However, if their children were to contract polio, will they
let them suffer and die because the medicine discovered was tested in animals? Is
an animal worth that much? In the grand plot of things, not really. The utilitarian
approach to life does support this mentality for if the use of animals to survive
JACKSON 6
brings the greatest good to humanity it is then clear that the greatest good has been
achieved.
JACKSON 7
Works Cited
Langley, Gill. Animal Experimentation. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1989
College, 1999