Haleema Saadia
Animals are suffering all over the world. The biggest reason for this is the overpopulation of humans. The human domination of the world has destroyed the habitats of most animals. Industrial farming, to feed more humans, has also increased the animal’s plight. The space available for animals to live a happy life has diminished drastically. Human overpopulation is not only damaging the earth but also other sentient beings which in the end is also damaging to humans themselves. According to the latest studies, over 1 quarter of the world’s mammals and over 40 per cent of amphibians are currently on the brink of extinction.
Another reason is the rise of speciesism in humans. Speciesism is the human-held belief that all other species are inferior and therefore they shouldn’t be given any moral consideration. The result is that some people are harming animals without any reason and just for the sake of pleasure. Most parents don’t admonish their kids for throwing stones at hapless stray dogs. The speciesism was propagated by many thinkers. Aristotle, the great Greek philosopher, said that animals are just ‘brute beasts’ who exist ‘for the sake of man’. Religions like Christianity and most others also awarded unique dignity to men. Descartes said animals are automata and have no souls thus they don’t suffer. All of them couldn’t provide irrefutable evidence in favour of the views they propounded.
The question is whether animals should be given moral consideration or not. There are two arguments. One is the ‘Rationality argument’ which says that since homo sapiens is the only specie that is rational, autonomous and self-conscious, hence only their interest should be considered of prime importance. But modern science has given credible evidence of animals evincing many of the qualities that give humans legal rights. The physiological and mental capacities of animals, though rudimentary, are quite similar to humans. Capacities that were once touted as unique to humans, such as developing family ties, solving social problems, expressing a diverse range of emotions, using language etcetera, are no longer uncontroversially unique to homo sapiens. Charles Darwin also recognised that grief, sympathy, memory, curiosity and attention are shown by many animals. Any person who has eyes can observe this too. This argument also disregards the love and empathy that many humans feel toward non-humans.
Another is the ‘argument from marginal cases’. Animals are being denied rights and legal standing on the pretext that they are not intelligent enough. But then many humans, who are cognitively impaired and even infants, are far less intelligent than many animals. Do we withhold justice and equality of rights from them? No. Thinkers, who favour this school of thought, say that justice and equality have nothing to do with the ability to reason but by the ability to suffer. Peter Singer, an Australian moral philosopher, regards speciesism as akin to racism and sexism. Weaker and different human groups are also declared as inferior beings by the dominant group. Animal activists are not unlike feminists of today who are resisting the commodification and violence perpetrated by the dominant group, who prefers the status quo.
Animals especially stray dogs are suffering immensely. Humans, who have taken most of the earth’s space, throw stones at them and call them menace. Some don’t slow their car when a stray is on the road. Unethical and inessential practices for human well-being such as factory farming and cosmetics testing on animals are also harming animals. The incidents of violence against hapless and innocent strays are increasing because there are no consequences for violence against animals.
That the stray dog population and suffering is rising is also our government’s fault. It should promulgate laws that protect animals. Moroever, the government have the wherewithal to vaccinate and sterilize stray dogs and cats. In addition, it can also make such changes in the curriculum which teach compassion and raise awareness about the rightness or wrongness of a particular action. Currently, the curriculum is such that religious bigots, apathetic and misogynists are being produced. Humans are also the cause of degradation in the earth’s environment. Men call themselves superior to animals yet it is man who defiles the earth wherever he appears and does immoral acts while animals are without sin and are not damaging our planet.
Some people have become desensitized and accustomed to the cruelty and abnormal things that are happening around them. This has normalised what should be abnormal and sustained the status quo. Some say that they do nothing to challenge the status quo because it seems impossible to change. People will keep abusing animals, eating more meat, using more plastic etcetera. But then there were plenty of horrible situations, from the global slave trade to the violation of women’s right to vote, that once seemed impossible to change too and had been normalised but they did change. Current horrible situations will change too if most of us try to change them. Our actions, however small they may be, will make a difference. Those humans, who want to do nothing to diminish animals’ suffering, should at least not be unkind to them. It will not cost them anything.
The question is whether animals should be given moral consideration or not. There are two arguments. One is the ‘Rationality argument’ which says that since homo sapiens is the only specie that is rational, autonomous and self-conscious, hence only their interest should be considered of prime importance. But modern science has given credible evidence of animals evincing many of the qualities that give humans legal rights. The physiological and mental capacities of animals, though rudimentary, are quite similar to humans. Capacities that were once touted as unique to humans, such as developing family ties, solving social problems, expressing a diverse range of emotions, using language etcetera, are no longer uncontroversially unique to homo sapiens. Charles Darwin also recognised that grief, sympathy, memory, curiosity and attention are shown by many animals. Any person who has eyes can observe this too. This argument also disregards the love and empathy that many humans feel toward non-humans.
Another is the ‘argument from marginal cases’. Animals are being denied rights and legal standing on the pretext that they are not intelligent enough. But then many humans, who are cognitively impaired and even infants, are far less intelligent than many animals. Do we withhold justice and equality of rights from them? No. Thinkers, who favour this school of thought, say that justice and equality have nothing to do with the ability to reason but by the ability to suffer. Peter Singer, an Australian moral philosopher, regards speciesism as akin to racism and sexism. Weaker and different human groups are also declared as inferior beings by the dominant group. Animal activists are not unlike feminists of today who are resisting the commodification and violence perpetrated by the dominant group, who prefers the status quo.
Animals especially stray dogs are suffering immensely. Humans, who have taken most of the earth’s space, throw stones at them and call them menace. Some don’t slow their car when a stray is on the road. Unethical and inessential practices for human well-being such as factory farming and cosmetics testing on animals are also harming animals. The incidents of violence against hapless and innocent strays are increasing because there are no consequences for violence against animals.
That the stray dog population and suffering is rising is also our government’s fault. It should promulgate laws that protect animals. Moroever, the government have the wherewithal to vaccinate and sterilize stray dogs and cats. In addition, it can also make such changes in the curriculum which teach compassion and raise awareness about the rightness or wrongness of a particular action. Currently, the curriculum is such that religious bigots, apathetic and misogynists are being produced. Humans are also the cause of degradation in the earth’s environment. Men call themselves superior to animals yet it is man who defiles the earth wherever he appears and does immoral acts while animals are without sin and are not damaging our planet.
Some people have become desensitized and accustomed to the cruelty and abnormal things that are happening around them. This has normalised what should be abnormal and sustained the status quo. Some say that they do nothing to challenge the status quo because it seems impossible to change. People will keep abusing animals, eating more meat, using more plastic etcetera. But then there were plenty of horrible situations, from the global slave trade to the violation of women’s right to vote, that once seemed impossible to change too and had been normalised but they did change. Current horrible situations will change too if most of us try to change them. Our actions, however small they may be, will make a difference. Those humans, who want to do nothing to diminish animals’ suffering, should at least not be unkind to them. It will not cost them anything.
