Rights and responsibilities

Finding in favour of the plaintiff.

In Dilemma 51, we not only pass the halfway mark, but also continue yesterday’s tale of Albert, who wins his case. The lab rats, sorry, scientists appeal by noting that Albert has no responsibilities and, therefore, no rights. But obviously there are also plenty of humans who have no responsibilities and would, according to this claim, have no rights. It would seem incredible that such people would be treated like Samuel, but that’s exactly what happened in Nazi Germany. The appeal fails and the lab appeal again.

In court, the counsel for the lab has a pig brought out, saying that although pigs are thought to be intelligent, no one would grant them rights. And to underline the point, the pig craps on the floor. The counsel notes that chimpanzees play no part in human society, hence the same rights cannot be meaningfully extended to them. At this, Albert gets up and goes and puts an arm around his trainer, Felicity.

My first thought is that humans interfere in the world of chimpanzees, which does bring them into our sphere. In Albert’s case, he’s even become part of human society, albeit in a limited way, by participating in various court cases. He’s also displayed some degree of abstract thinking, although how far that might be taken and defined is another matter. I still don’t think that any animal should have exactly the same rights as humans, but they should have some rights to protect them from mistreatment and abuse.

As I said yesterday, it also depends on how we view the animal in question. Higher primates and pets will clearly be given more consideration than common or garden domesticated animals; animals which are regarded as vermin – rats, mice, pigeons – don’t tend to get much sympathy.

Tomorrow, Thomas, who’s not a chimpanzee, has something to say about Plato’s Meno. Till then.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FH5, Series 37, Week 4

FH5, Series 29, Week 4

FH5, Series 38, preview