3. At Duke University, scientists are genetically engineering pigs with human ge
ID: 131014 • Letter: 3
Question
3. At Duke University, scientists are genetically engineering pigs with human genes so that their the transplanting of organs from livers will be more compatible with humans. one species of animal into another - may offer a solution to the shortage of organs for transplant, even though there is the risk of introducing an infectious disease from the viruses that are harmless to the specie but lethal to humans. Do animals deserve the moral respect that we are normally owed to other humans? Discuss what Peter Singer, Tom Regan and Carl Cohen would respond to this question. Explain and support your position -Thank you. Have a nice winter break!Explanation / Answer
Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. Also, at the end of the answer, you must write whether you personally support this treatment or not with the help of the argument I have provided below.
(Answer) By the standards of evolution, it is mundane for one animal to kill another in order to maintain a rank in the food chain. It has been the axiom for millions of years. However, it is only recently that the human species have begun to kill for tertiary wants like fur, shoes and belts.
Is disembowelment of an animal for the purpose of elongating the life of another who is physically frail and perhaps diseased, even ethical? If this question is answered objectively, the quickest counter-argument would be, “Would you care about animal right if it were your loved-one?”
Therefore, instead of presenting an argument, it would be better to present the same scenario with a different perspective. Would the human's revolt if the pigs were to genetically splice the humans, disembowel them and leave them to die if they could save a pig who were otherwise destined to die?
If the right to live and not be violated is determined by the intellectual capacity of a creature, then perhaps people with lower IQ levels would be in big trouble.
Peter Singer is the author of the book “Animal Liberation.” Through his works and philosophy, he has established new paradigms in the philosophy of ethical treatment of animals.
Similarly, Carl Cohen vehemently disagreed to support animal testing and their mistreatment. On the other hand Tom Regan, who wrote the book “The Case of Animal Rights”, specialises in the genre of animal treatment and an objective approach to animal testing.
Peter Singer and Carl Cohen would probably talk about the ill-effects of using animal organs and the medical connotation. However, they would probably both agree that this discussion goes above the pros and cons. It is a matter of losing one’s compassion in exchange for living a few more years.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.