From: ra-AT-alor.univ-montp3.fr (Ronald Creagh, Moderator, Research on Anarchism List)
Date: 27 Jan 1997 12:04:54 UTC   (08:04:54 AM in author's locale)
To: RA-L-AT-bred.univ-montp3.fr

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:39:51 -0600 (CST)
>From: John Clark <clark-AT-beta.loyno.edu>
Dear list-members:
I find that Harald Beyer-Arnesen's criticisms of animal rights advocates
contain some very shaky arguments, to say the least. For example, he says
that:
> The popularity in some circles, especially in the US, of notions
> like "animal rights" and "speciesism" seem to derive from an
> urban way of life. Often it also reflects the social background
> of people; the alienation of "middle class" life.
This is a classic example of an ad hominem argument. It's quite possible
that such seemingly crazy "notions" might be popular with urban dwellers
and alienated petit bourgeois types, but yet be absolutely brilliant
examples of truth.
He states further that:
> In fact human beings is the only species on this earth that given the
> opportunity would NOT exterminate all other species, or ever consider
> that other species have "rights".
While "urban dwellers" tend to think that the planet consists primarily
of human beings, domestic pets, whales, and other popular species, the
earth is in fact populated by large numbers of insects, plants, and lots
of plankton. It is difficult to imagine what it would mean to give
zooplankton the opportunity to exterminate other species, or ponder
whether ants would or would not "consider" any kind of "rights." (The
statement doesn't make a lot of sense if we consider dogs or dolphins
either). In view of such statements, I'm not sure why we should consider
the animal rights advocates to be the unrealistic ones. They never
suggest considering such bizarre possibilities.
And we are urged to consider whether various creatures should be:
> given the "right" to vote also, or should they be discriminated on in
> this field? Should they have duties, like not to kill? Should
> rattle snakes be forced to become vegetarians?
I can't see how the results of elections would be significantly worse if
animals were given the right to vote. But even though I advocate this
(in addition to their holding high office), animal rights advocates do
not. They realize that there is a difference between being a moral agent
(having the sort of intelligence and will that allows conscious, rational
choice) and being a moral patient (having some kind of experience that
deserves consideration). So even if I do succeed in nominating my
favorite insect for president, I can't count on the support of animal
rights advocates.
for the right to arm bears,
John

TO SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERYONE write to RA-L-AT-bred.univ-montp3.fr.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, WRITE TO : listserv-AT-bred.univ-montp3.fr
with the text SIGnoff RA-L (no subject nor signature).

Moderator/Moderador/Moderateur : Ronald Creagh
Co-Moderator : John P. Clark
e-mail : rcreagh-AT-alor.univ-montp3.fr
snail mail/correo ordinario/courrier ordinaire : Ronald Creagh, Universite
Paul Valery, B.P. 5043, 34032, Montpellier-Cedex, France.
fax : (33) 67 64 77 23