Transcript In Defense Of Humans: The Case Against Animal Rights

In Defense Of Humans:
The Case Against Animal Rights
Geordie Duckler, J.D., Ph.D.
1. Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for our Treatment of Animals. [P. Singer 1975]
2. On The Fifth Day: Animal Rights and Human Ethics. [ed. R. Morris and M. Fox 1976]
3. Animal Rights and Human Obligations. [ed. T. Regan and P. Singer 1976]
4. The Case for Animal Rights. [T. Regan 1983]
5. Animals and Why They Matter [M. Midgely 1983]
6. Environmental Justice. [P. Wenz 1988]
7. Animal Revolution [R. Ryder 1989]
8. Animal Rights Crusade. [J. Jasper and D. Nelkin 1991]
9. The Animal Rights/Environmental Ethics Debate. [E. Hargrove 1992]
10. Animal Rights and Human Morality [B. Rollin 1992]
11. Animals, Property & The Law (Ethics And Action). [G. Francione 1995]
12. Animal Rights: The Changing Debate. [1996]
13. Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Animals. [F. de Waal 1996]
14. Natural Relations: Ecology, Animal Rights, and Social Justice. [T. Benton 1996]
15. Animal Rights: A Beginner’s Guide [A. Achor 1996]
16. Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or Your Dog? [G. Francione 2000]
17. Evolution, Animal ‘Rights’, and the Environment. [J. B. Reichmann 2000]
18. Beyond Animal Rights: A Feminist Caring Ethic for the Treatment of Animals. [C. Adams 2000]
19. The Animal Rights Debate. [C. Cohen and T. Regan 2001]
20. Rattling The Cage: Toward Legal Rights For Animals. [S. Wise 2001]
21. Animal Equality [A. Dunayer 2001]
22. Drawing the Line. [S. Wise 2002]
23. Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. [D. DeGrazia 2002]
24. In Nature's Interests?: Interests, Animal Rights, and Environmental Ethics. [G. Varner 2002]
25. The Animal Ethics Reader.[ed. S.J. Armstrong and R. G. Botzler 2003]
26. Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy. [ M. Scully 2003]
27. Animal Rights, Human Wrongs: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. [T. Regan 2003]
28. Animals and Ethics: An Overview of the Philosophical Debate. [A. Taylor 2003]
29. The Animal Question: Why Nonhuman Animals Deserve Human Rights. [P. Cavalieri 2004]
30. Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions. [C. Sunstein and M. Nussbaum 2004]
31. Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. [A. Linzey and P. Clarke 2004]
32. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology. [M. Zimmerman 2004]
33. Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights. [T. Regan and J. Masson 2005]
34. Do Animals Have Rights? [A. Hills 2005]
35. Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. [J. Franklin 2006]
36. Defending Animal Rights. [T. Regan 2006]
37. Animal Rights & Human Morality. [B. Rollin 2006]
38. For the Prevention of Cruelty: History and Legacy of Animal Rights Activism. [D. Beers 2006]
39. Animal Rights and Wrongs. [R. Scruton 2006]
40. Making A Killing: The Political Economy of Animal Rights. [B. Torres 2007]
41. Why Animals Matter: The Case for Animal Protection. [E. Williams 2007]
42. Animals as Persons: Essays on the Abolition of Animal Exploitation. [G. Francione 2009]
43. The PETA Practical Guide to Animal Rights. [I. Newkirk 2009]
44. Animal Rights: Moral Theory and Practice. [M. Rowlands 2009]
45. The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation? [G. Francione and R. Gardner 2010]
46. Animal Rights (Introducing Issues With Opposing Viewpoints). [L. Friedman 2010]
47. The Animal Manifesto: Six Reasons for Expanding Our Compassion Footprint. [M. Bekoff 2010]
48. Beyond Animal Rights: Food, Pets and Ethics (Think Now). [T. Milligan 2010]
49. The Philosophy of Animal Rights. [M. Engle and K. Jenni 2010]
50. Animal Law: Welfare Interests & Rights. [D. Favre 2011]
51. Ethics and Animals: An Introduction. [L. Gruen 2011]
52. Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs to Know. [ P. Waldau 2011]
Thesis
Axiom #1:
Legal rights are only meaningful when accompanied by
corresponding legal obligations.
Axiom #2:
The act of imposing obligations is only meaningful where the
subject both comprehends the concept of responsibility, and has
agreed to adhere to social compacts about responsibility (or
where his or her agreement can be implied).
Observation #1:
A subject’s comprehension of responsibility, and their adherence
to social compacts, can only be confirmed through legal
procedures, acts which require the subject’s participation using
specialized forms of writing, speech, and hearing, i.e., language.
Inference #1:
To comprehend responsibility and to adhere to social compacts
therefore requires language.
Observation #2:
Only humans have true language.
Inference #2:
Only humans therefore can have true legal rights.
LEGAL RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
• Obligation imposed on holder
in order to enjoy the right
• Holder must accept the obligation and agree to a
penalty for noncompliance
• Procedure to determine holder being informed of,
understanding, and complying with obligation
LEGAL RIGHT TO PLEAD GUILTY
• Obligation imposed on holder
in order to enjoy the right
• Holder must accept the obligation and agree to a
penalty for noncompliance
• Procedure to determine holder being informed of,
understanding, and complying with obligation
Self-restraint and
the control of behavior
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
• Are mediated by persuasion and argument
• In turn are valued through agreements
and breaches; the use of influence
• In turn made meaningful by self-restraint
in its public and private expression
• All of which require language
Deciphering animal awareness and intent
The qualitative distinction between human
language and all animal communication arises
from the power of “grammar”:
• Infinite via its combinatorial potential
• Digital via its arrangement of discrete elements
• Compositional via deriving meaning from its parts
Rights are expressed
through legal procedures
Three mechanisms required
to express legal rights:
• Pleading: a public assertion of the right
• Discovery: a public uncovering of the right
• Trial: a public presentation of the right
Expressions of understanding and intent
Humans:
•Character evidence rarely allowed
• Human “nature” evidence never allowed
• Intent determined by direct testimony or by
inference from current behaviors
Animals:
• Propensity evidence always allowed
• Animal “nature” evidence allowed
• Intent determined rarely, and even then only by
inference from historical behaviors
Animals as children
Animal incapacities which affect legal rights
• nonuse of symbolic representations
• no objectively reliable indicia that
behavior reflects internal thoughts
• no ability to transmit details of
understanding or comprehension
• no ability to express
agreement or promise
• no recognition of social
responsibility for conduct
Legal rights reflect adherence to a social contract…
…which arises
historically through
the use of language…
…and which is sustained
by mutually agreed-upon
written rules
Axiom #1:
Legal rights are only meaningful when accompanied by
corresponding legal obligations.
Axiom #2:
The act of imposing obligations is only meaningful where the
subject both comprehends the concept of responsibility, and has
agreed to adhere to social compacts about responsibility (or
where his or her agreement can be implied).
Observation #1:
A subject’s comprehension of responsibility, and their adherence
to social compacts, can only be confirmed through legal
procedures, acts which require the subject’s participation using
specialized forms of writing, speech, and hearing, i.e., language.
Inference #1:
To comprehend responsibility and to adhere to social compacts
therefore requires language.
Observation #2:
Only humans have true language.
Inference #2:
Only humans therefore can have true legal rights.
Animals as rights-holders