Download The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan
Understanding the means the best ways to get this book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan is also important. You have been in right site to begin getting this information. Get the The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan web link that we provide right here as well as see the link. You can buy guide The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan or get it when possible. You can swiftly download this The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan after obtaining deal. So, when you need the book rapidly, you can straight get it. It's so easy and so fats, right? You need to favor to in this manner.
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan
Download The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan
Reserve The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan is among the priceless well worth that will make you always rich. It will certainly not mean as rich as the cash give you. When some people have lack to face the life, people with lots of publications occasionally will be smarter in doing the life. Why should be book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan It is actually not implied that book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan will provide you power to get to every little thing. Guide is to review as well as exactly what we implied is guide that is checked out. You could additionally see how guide qualifies The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan and also numbers of e-book collections are providing here.
When some people looking at you while reviewing The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan, you could feel so honored. But, instead of other people feels you need to instil in yourself that you are reading The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan not as a result of that reasons. Reading this The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan will give you greater than individuals appreciate. It will certainly guide to know greater than individuals looking at you. Already, there are several resources to knowing, reviewing a book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan still becomes the front runner as an excellent method.
Why must be reading The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan Once again, it will rely on just how you feel and also think of it. It is surely that people of the benefit to take when reading this The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan; you could take much more lessons straight. Also you have actually not undertaken it in your life; you can get the encounter by checking out The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan And also now, we will present you with the on the internet book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan in this internet site.
What sort of publication The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan you will favor to? Now, you will not take the published publication. It is your time to get soft file book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan instead the printed records. You can enjoy this soft documents The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan in whenever you anticipate. Even it is in expected area as the various other do, you can check out the book The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan in your gadget. Or if you desire a lot more, you can read on your computer or laptop to get complete screen leading. Juts locate it here by downloading the soft data The Animal Rights Debate, By Carl Cohen, Tom Regan in web link page.
Do all animals have rights? Is it morally wrong to use mice or dogs in medical research, or rabbits and cows as food? How ought we resolve conflicts between the interests of humans and those of other animals? Philosophical inquiry is essential in addressing such questions; the answers given must have enormous practical importance. Here for the first time in the same volume, the animal rights debate is argued deeply and fully by the two most articulate and influential philosophers representing the opposing camps. Each makes his case in turn to the opposing case. The arguments meet head on: Are we humans morally justified in using animals as we do? A vexed and enduring controversy here receives its deepest and most eloquent exposition.
- Sales Rank: #2134903 in Books
- Brand: Brand: Rowman Littlefield Publishers
- Published on: 2001-05
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.96" h x .69" w x 5.86" l, .94 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 336 pages
- ISBN13: 9780847696635
- Condition: New
- Notes: BRAND NEW FROM PUBLISHER! 100% Satisfaction Guarantee. Tracking provided on most orders. Buy with Confidence! Millions of books sold!
From Publishers Weekly
Regan (The Case for Animal Rights) is well known as a rights advocate, while Cohen (Naked Racial Preference: The Case Against Affirmative Action) is considered one of Regan's most ardent detractors. Although the two philosophy professors agree on some issues within the debate they both like animals, and believe animals feel pain, have emotions and deserve to be treated humanely on most others, they are diametrically opposed. Cohen (who teaches at the University of Michigan) believes animals do not have rights, and seeing no alternative to animal medical experimentation, finds it fully justified. Regan (who teaches at North Carolina State University) seeks the abolition of all animal experimentation, the fur industry and all commercial animal farming. Cohen feels justified being a "speciesist," whereas Regan considers speciesism "a moral prejudice" and wrong. Differences also manifest in the authors' styles of collegiality. Cohen calls Regan "Tom" and "Regan" and a friend despite adopting a condescending tone toward his arguments and pronouncing him a "zealot," a "fanatic" and "profoundly mistaken." Regan calls his opponent "Professor Cohen" or "Cohen." He is "disappointed" in some of Cohen's beliefs, believes Cohen's brief is "poorly reasoned and researched" and lists the failures he perceives in Cohen's argument, but remains civil throughout, bolstering his credibility. Though this fascinating treatise will primarily appeal to students and animal rights proponents, it might reach a much wider audience.
Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.
Review
A fascinating treatise . . . [that] appeals primarily to students and animal rights proponents. (Publishers Weekly)
The volume should be in the library of any school where philosophy is taught or animal research conducted, that is, in nearly every academic library. (CHOICE)
Tom Regan is without doubt the world's greatest defender of the rights of animals. Carl Cohen is one of Regan's notable critics. Here, between the pages of a single volume, are important new contributions from each of these authors. The resulting text isrequired reading for everyone interested in this critical issue.... (Gary Comstock, Iowa State University)
The book would make an ideal main text in a seminar on animals, ethics, and science for advanced undergraduate or graduate students in philosophy, biological sciences, experimental psychology, or the health-professions, including veterinary sciences. (Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association)
The book is enormously entertaining, and both writers succeed in making it clear and simple. (Radical Philosophy)
A tour de force of brilliant debate. No other 'seeing the issues from both sides' book comes close to this one in the sustained power of argumentation and in its thorough canvassing of the issues surrounding everything that might be said about the ethical treatment of animals. Quite simply, the best book of its kind. (Sidney Gendin, Eastern Michigan University)
Tom Regan is without doubt the world's greatest defender of the rights of animals. Carl Cohen is one of Regan's notable critics. Here, between the pages of a single volume, are important new contributions from each of these authors. The resulting text is required reading for everyone interested in thiscritical issue. (Gary Comstock, Iowa State University)
The two [Cohen and Regan] argue vigorously and write clearly, producing an engaging, accessible book. (Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy)
About the Author
Carl Cohen is professor of philosophy at University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Tom Regan is professor of philosophy at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Most helpful customer reviews
13 of 20 people found the following review helpful.
a good text for an Ethics and Animals course
By Nathan Nobis
Regan's contribution is impressive. Regan's section is where to begin. He argues that whether a being has rights (and which rights it has) depends on its psychological capacities, not its biological species per se. Since babies and mentally challenged humans (who aren't rational or autonomous) have the right not to be eaten, worn, experimented on, chased down and shot and their heads hung on the wall, etc., so do non-human animals, since their psychologies are of comparable, if not often greater, levels. QED.
Objections to Regan concern his general theory of rights, NOT whether animals have them, if anyone does (many plausible moralities deny "rights" in the sense Regan defends).
According to Cohen, animals do not have rights because they animals cannot engage in moral deliberation, act on principles, and be moral agents.
Many humans cannot cannot engage in moral deliberation, act on principles, and be moral agents and hvae the capacities that Cohen seems to think are necessary for having rights. But, most of us think it would be wrong to experiment on them and kill them, even if doing so would greatly advance our interests. Cohen agrees. But since some humans lack these capacities yet have rights, this shows that these capacities are not necessary for rights. Cohen's denying rights to animals is arbitrary, a case of not treating beings with equal psychological capacities as equals: it is discrimination on the basis of species alone.
Cohen replies that objections like this "miss the point badly" because human infants, the senile, and the severely mentally disabled "have rights because they are human." He says that, "The critical distinction is one of kind." Earlier Cohen said that the "kind" needed for rights possession was a moral and psychological kind; now he says that the relevant kind is the biological kind Homo sapiens. No justification is given for this switch and why humans who (even permanently) lack moral capacities have rights yet animals do not.
Cohen's reply to this objection--the so called "argument from marginal cases"--is unsuccessful and his main argument that animals do not have rights fails. Appeals to thinkers ranging from Aquinas and Augustine to Marx and Lenin, as well as appeals to "immediate" and "certain" intuitions, do little to defend his view either. His repeated ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with him do not help either.
Cohen also argues that animals don't have rights because it's in our interest to use them. It's scientificaly dubious that using animals for food and research is in our best interest (both vegetarian diets and human-based research are superior for meeting our needs), but questions about morality shouldn't be decided by appeal to self-interest anyway. Cohen's case that animals do not have rights is a disappointment.
26 of 38 people found the following review helpful.
And the Winner Is...
By Rick Bogle
I began reading The Animal Rights Debate with the expectation that debate between two philosophy professors might truly illuminate the issues at hand in the continuing, in fact, increasing, discussion regarding the relationship between humans and other animals.
Tom Regan is well known for his sharp and careful analysis, and I expected anyone paired with him in a book of this nature to be similarly prepared for the discussion. Mr. Cohen did write as if he knew what he was writing about, but unfortunately for the reader, he did not.
From the first pages of Mr. Cohen's article, errors of fact are rife. He says, "The Department of Agriculture recently estimated the number of animals used in medical and pharmaceutical research to be about 1.6 million, of which the vast majority, approximately 90%, were rats, mice, and other rodents." (p 14)
In fact, mice, rats, and birds are specifically excluded from the statistics Mr. Cohen cites; the Department of Agriculture (USDA) figures do not include mice, rats, or birds because the Animal Welfare Act excludes these animals from coverage under the act. This is very well known by all observers. Industry estimates suggest that at least 30 million mice and rats are used annually.
He also claims that "every" lab using animals is subject to "frequent" inspection by the Department of Agriculture to insure the humane use of the animals in those labs. The USDA, in fact, estimates that at least 2000 labs in the US are not inspected because they use only mice, rats, or birds, and these animals are not counted as animals under U.S. law. Humane use is not at issue even during the inspections of the labs that do fall within the purview of the agency.
I was shocked by Mr. Cohen's lack of command of the basic facts regarding animals used in U.S. laboratories, and more so by his claim that he was presenting the facts.
As far as Mr. Cohen's philosophical arguments are concerned, aside from his factual errors, I found his claims to be a mix of circular reasoning: only humans have rights, animals aren't human, so animals can't have rights; bait and switch: he makes the correct claim that most animals used in labs are rodents, and then calls attention to polio, the investigation of which almost eliminated rhesus monkeys from India; demonizing: he goes out of his way to paint rats as the ugliest and meanest creatures imaginable, and other similarly suspect techniques used commonly to confuse an audience.
But, this book thrilled me nevertheless. The arguments put forth by Mr. Regan are straightforward, fact driven, and polite. His logic is impeccable and his conclusions inescapable.
It is at once gladdening to see the best that each side in the debate can muster clearly displays the fact that animals do have inherent rights. Indeed, based on the arguments presented in this book, the debate is over. It remains painful to realize that the essentially failed attempt by Mr. Cohen is nevertheless the weak excuse for the continuing daily massive exploitation of other animals by us. If you have an interest in seeing an opponent of animal rights get thoroughly trounced, then I think you will like this book. If you are looking for reasoned debate, unfortunately, the defenders of the status quo have yet to muster a meaningful and cogent argument.
6 of 13 people found the following review helpful.
Cohen needs to consult his logic text
By David K. Braden-Johnson
Cohen's sophomoric replies to Regan's claims for extending basic moral consideration to nonhuman animals makes a mockery of this debate (a surprising deficit, given Cohen's training and reputation as a logician). Regan, in contrast, is scholarly and thoughtful, though one suspects that his case for "animal rights" (and consequent absolutism) continues to faulter against the foundational assumption of the "equal inherent value of all subjects of a life" and concommitant rejection of all extrinsic (relational) ethical considerations. See M. Silliman, *Sentience and Sensibility,* for an value-incrementalist alternative to Regan's antiperfectionist unicriterialism.
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan PDF
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan EPub
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan Doc
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan iBooks
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan rtf
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan Mobipocket
The Animal Rights Debate, by Carl Cohen, Tom Regan Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar