Basic Principles Of Equality In Peter Singer's All Animals Are Equal

In All Animals Are Equal, the philosopher Peter Singer argues that we should extend the basic principle of equality to non-human animals. In order to justify this claim, the author examines the foundations of the basic principle of equality, establishing a moral system that takes into account the equal consideration of interests of living beings. Peter Singer states that in order for a being to have interests at all, one must take into account the capacity of suffering and enjoyment, or in other words, sentience. Throughout this chapter, Singer makes his readers see that if one rejects racism and sexism, one must also reject the idea of giving special consideration to the interests of one species over another one. In this essay, I will firstly reconstruct the arguments used by Singer to arrive at the conclusion that all animals are equal. Secondly, I will evaluate the justifications that he uses to arrive at such claim. Finally, I will argue that humans …show more content…
While non-human animals devote most of their time to satisfy instinctual needs, humans have the ability to write intricate pieces of literary fiction or thinking about what party candidate best represents their ideology and social needs. Why should we extend the principle of equality to non-human animals if there are a plethora of differences between the humankind and other species? Peter Singer argues that there “is no barrier to the case of extending the basic principle of equality to nonhuman animals” (Singer, 1989, p. 149), for the differences between humans and other animals can be addressed by providing different treatment and rights to the needs of each group. When Singer says that we need to extend the basic principle of equality, he specifies that he will consider this principle to be equality of consideration. What the author means is that we ought not to give greater weight to the interests of one group over