Animal Ethics in the Real World

In 1967, there was a famous ethical dilemmas posted by Judith Jarvis Thomson. Basically the dilemmas goes something like this, either we pull the lever of runaway trolley to kill five or to kill one? This old dilemmas has been studied ever since by student of ethics. However, little can we found the real example of the case happening in our life. We can draw principle from it, yet we need more real case to be solved and to thinketh of. One of the thinker that has move one forward ahead is Peter Singer. He realized how ethics should be brought down to earth, to discuss things that matters not just conceptually but realistically. There are around 82 essays in his book Ethics in the Real World that worth considering, especially about animal.  Surprisingly, Peter bring the data from Victoria Braithwaite on how actually the fish are capable of feeling pain. This new finding surely will affect on our method to catch fish in the future, to find less cruel way and even, probably start to stop eating them? Maybe up to this point, fish lover will have a new dilemma here. 

Apparently, the topic regarding animal ethics was quite rare until 1970, when the animal liberation movement began, things are getting better ahead. Even it has already creeping to the world of theology (Theology of Animal). Yet, there are still vast amount of issues that not to be addressed for the subject itself is quite young in the field and world of ethics. The first and classic groundbreaking work of Peter Singer Animal Liberation: The Definitive Classic of Animal Movement  is also cannot be ignored. He argued that how we are often plagued by speciesism and easily put disinterest in our action for the matter of animal right. He says speciesism is a "prejudice" and "bias". He got it right. Most of us are never reconsidering our action toward animal for we might instantly look at them as tiny little and insignificant for we believe they are in a lower strata of being. In history, the notion that animal is lower than human being derived mostly from Aristotle because of the main reason that animal lack of rationality then afterwards, Stoics even denied that animal has in any way a capacity of reasoning. 

In further development, Kant was the one who has raised the bar of animal ethics up to the next level.  Better than previous thinker, I presume. He argue on how we need to see animal in a causal relation. The ethical responsibility of taking care of animal come from the direct implication of animal to humanity. One of the example is when the owner of the dog shot the dog because he can no longer earn a living for the dog, it is a wrong thing because it bring harm to the torturers to which the society which torturer belong. The torturer will be labeled as evil by dog lover around him hence, his action cannot be justifiable. Although this ethical example thinking of Kant can be good in Western world, it assumed that all societies behave in a same way. If in some part of Eastern world, whereby dogs are allowed to be eaten. Can we say the action of torturing and killing dog is wrong in that particular culture? Although Kant has raised up the ethics, there are still lot of questions poops out into existence pertaining animal ethics. Has animal in themselves owned a ethical dignity and intrinsic value or only given by human? Is there an agency in animal? Do human have obligation to animal? All those questions  should be pondered deeply before we can have a reasonable basis on how we should treat them properly. We cannot take for granted their existence as our co-existent partner of being in this earth. In this case, I think Marc Berkoff has made an excellent job on listing six basic reason on why we need to expanding our compassions to animal,

First, our common bound of compassion. Second, All animal shares the earth and we must co-exits. Third, Animal have and deserve compassion. Four, Connection, breeds caring, Alienation Breeds disrespect. Five, Our world is not compassionate to animals. Six, acting compassionately helps all beings and all the world. His work is a good start for those who like to ponder the issue of animal ethics deeper. Without doubt, Marc could challenges the reader to think deeply the reason why we should care and treat animal better. Just that, in his evolutionary view of seeing animal as different rather than lower bring a implicit conclusion that  we shall move to the vegetarianism direction. Of course, the morality of eating animal is the subsequent and definitely the most relevant issue that is inescapable, when we muse on the world of animal ethics. This is not an easy subject to handle and will surely intersect closely with various religious worldview. To conclude and kindle the interest toward the subject further, the voice of Singer once again echoes that everyone requires "equal consideration for different beings".