средне профессиональное образование по сертификации
Главное меню:
Интересное
средне профессиональное образование по сертификации, Philosopher Peter Singer: ‘There’s no reason to say - PressReader, BBC - Ethics - Animal ethics: Moral status of animals, Singer - The Value of Animals vs. Humans: An Interview on Ethics - Studocu, Peter Singer is not Animal Liberation Now | DawnWatch, News, sport and opinion from the Guardian's US edition | The Guardian, Theories of Moral Considerability: Who and What Matters Morally?, Moral circle expansion: should animals, plants, and robots have the .
BBC iD Settings Sign out Search term: BBC navigation BBC links BBC © 2014 This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so. , Australian philosopher Peter Singer’s book Animal Liberation, published in 1975, exposed the realities of life for animals in factory farms and testing laboratories and provided a powerful moral basis for rethinking our relationship to them., Which animals deserve moral consideration? The idea that non-human animals have significant moral status is comparatively modern. It owes much to the work of philosopher Peter Singer.
Philosopher Peter Singer: ‘There’s no reason to say humans have more worth or moral status than animals’ | Animal welfare | … https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/21/philosopher-peter-singer-theres-no-reason-to-say-humans-have-more-worth-or-moral-status-th…, Based on my commitment to keep our movement informed of major media stories about animals, I recently sent out, on DawnWatch, a New York Times op-ed written by Peter Singer. I did not comment on it, though I know my readers expect me to weigh in on what I send., We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us., According to ratiocentrism, adult humans deserve moral consideration because they are rational (i.e., they act on reasons, not just on impulses or instincts).[4] Ratiocentrism has the plausible implication that if rational space aliens exist, they also deserve moral consideration., The process should not stop there,” Singer wrote in his 1981 book The Expanding Circle, adding that to stop at human beings would be arbitrary., Secular arguments for equal and exclusively human worth generally tend to follow one of two strategies..