There are essentially three perspectives regarding the moral status of animals: Animal welfare, Human dominion, and Animal rights.Animal Welfare
The animal welfare perspective advances the idea that humans are stewards of animals. The lives of non human animals have intrinsic value; however, it is up to humans to determine how to maximize the values of non human animals by using animals in a variety of ways.
Under this heading various traditional uses of animals are permitted, as long as they serve non--trivial ends and are conducted in ways that eliminate unnecessary animal suffering. Under this heading for instance medical research conducted upon non human animals is considered to be legitimate and ethical since there is a greater good which is potentially accomplished through this research.
In addition, this approach would also advocate that animal slaughter for the purpose of the human consumption of food is advocate since the humane slaughter of animals is carried out for a higher good and in addition humane slaughter is aimed at preventing needless suffering in the non human animal.
On perhaps an even more practical level, this approach would also permit the hunting of non human animals for the purposes of preventing wildlife overpopulation.
There are three foundational philosophical principles underlying the Animal welfare position.
First, the position assumes that we have a moral obligation to balance benefits and harms as related to non human animals.
Second, the position advances the idea that if an animal can suffer pain, then we have a moral obligation to balance this harm against the benefits of any human use of the animal.
Finally, the Animal welfare position argues that we should use animals when the benefits to us outweigh the costs to them, but in doing so, we should eliminate unnecessary animal suffering.
Some philosophers justify their contention that only non human animals have rights on the basis of the following:
Only human beings have rights. According to this principle an individual that has a right to something must be able to claim that thing for himself. Since animals are not capable or representing themselves in this way they cannot have rights.
Only human beings are rational, autonomous and self conscious. These attributes confer a full and equal moral status upon those possessing them.
Only human animals have the capability to choose between various courses of action on the basis of rationality rather than instinct.
In addition, only human animals possess the capacity to enjoy great art, literature or the benefits of deep and significant relationships.
Only human beings can act morally. Human beings possess the capacity to act morally have the consequent capacity to demonstrate sacrifice in order to accomplish a greater good.
Only human beings are part of the moral community. This criterion is rooted in the affirmation that only human beings have the capacity to participate in political, economic and familial relationships.
This perspective argues that such is not the case with the non human animal.
Consequently human beings should be afforded greater moral status.
