August 01, 2008 The ethics of food-5: Pain and suffering (For
other posts in this series, see here.) Philosopher and advocate
of animal rights Peter Singer is sometimes accused of going out
of his way to make deliberately outrageous statements. From what
I have read of him, this charge seems unjust. He strikes me as a
very thoughtful philosopher who is not being merely a
provocateur but is skillfully using the argument from marginal
cases to show us the consequences of carrying the often glib
justifications we use to justify our treatment of animals to
their logical conclusion. The end result often makes us
uncomfortable, which may explain the somewhat heated responses
he generates. Singer is not arguing that all animals be treated
just like humans. He accepts that we do differ in morally
significant ways. What he is asking for is that we not judge
purely on the basis of this or that quality but on the equal
consideration of interests. Equal consideration of interests is
not the same as equal treatment, [Sing