Exam #2 (Chapter 37)

Bring this test, printed, headed (top, left hand-side) Times New Roman, p. 12,

Heading:

Phi 2604, Test #2
T,R 8:25am
Doe, John

____________________________________

1- What is the main argument of Tom Regan's "The Case for Animal Rigthts"?
2- Mary Anne Warren disagrees with Regan. Why?

person_p= a being with 1. reason, 2. sentience, 3. autonomy, 4. free will?

3- what is the "weak animal rights" position?
4- Mary Anne Warren takes Regan's argument into three stages: mention each one.
5- Take this of the best known animal rights defender utilitarian Peter Singer:

In "Animal Liberation," Singer argues that in assessing the consequences of our actions, it is necessary to take the interests of animals seriously and to weigh any adverse affect on those interests from human actions as part of the consequences of those actions. Humans have failed to do this, Singer argues, because of a species bias, or speciesism, that results in a systematic devaluation of animal interests. Singer claims that speciesism is no more morally defensible than racism, sexism, or other forms of discrimination that arbitrarily exclude humans from the scope of moral concern.

Do you agree with Singer that our treatment of animals shows this kind of species bias? If so, provide one example.

6- What does "inherent value" mean?
7- How does a "perfectionist theory" is adumbrated into the "inherent value" argument according to Regan?
8- What is the "respect principle"?
9- From Regan's perspective, do the trees in a forest have inherent values? why?
10- Do you see a difference between "value" and "right"? Explain.
11- Do you agree with Mary Anne Warren argument in p. 348 of how much is enough?
12- What is Regan's answer to the objection of how far down the biological ladder should we go in granting rights?
13- Do you take the following quote by Mary Ann Warren as a defense of animal rights? If so, what kind?

The weak animal rights position seems an unstable compromise between the bold claim that animals have the same basic moral rights that we do and the common view that animals have no rights at all.

14- Then on p. 352, Mary Ann Warren declares this:

The most plausible alternative to the view that animals have moral rights is that although they do not have rights, we are, however obligated not to be cruel to them.  

 Is she definitely defending this position as a substitute to Regan's? If think not, what is she saying?