PHIL 2010: Introduction to Ethics: explain what you see as the core of the argument that Kant makes for the conclusion that non-human animals do not have rights. What specific claims (or premises) does Kant use to defend his conclusion?
Short Writing Assignment 4
This short essay (~2 pgs, double spaced, standard formatting) asks you to consider how Peter Singer would reply to Immanuel Kant’s claim that non-human animals do not have rights. To do this, your paper should have two parts.
First, drawing on the Kant essay and our class discussions, explain what you see as the core of the argument that Kant makes for the conclusion that non-human animals do not have rights. What specific claims (or premises) does Kant use to defend his conclusion? What evidence, reason, or examples does he use to explain why he thinks these claims/premises are plausible? How do the various parts of Kant’s argument fit together?
Second, using the Singer paper, “All Animals Are Equal,” and our class discussion, explain how you think Singer would respond to Kant. In particular, you should identify a specific part of Kant’s argument that you think Singer would challenge. You should also explain the reasons Singer would give for thinking that part of Kant’s argument is mistaken. Finally, you should conclude your argument by briefly explaining whether you think Singer’s objection is successful.
TO GET THIS OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT DONE FOR YOU FROM SCRATCH, PLACE A NEW ORDER HERE