I believe that the concept of animal rights is a purely human concept; and we bestow this right out of our capacity of empathy. Yet, the nature of this world is survival. We are all part of the food web and the ecosystem, where the fittest survive by whatever means they do. For humans, nature is identified as brutal, unfair and most especially, cruel. We, as human beings, are unique in this natural world in that we communicate, express ourselves, and classify for the purpose of upholding our condition.
My belief, however, is that we should minimize these animal sufferings and improve their welfare, especially when serving us and encapsulating their home territories. It’s like giving respect to them and believing that they also exist in this world as entities.
We should also be wary of preserving the species and the diverse gene pools in the whole animal and plant kingdom is only to our benefit. Our capacity to survive our population explosion depends critically on a healthy and sustainable ecosystem, therefore our ability to derive food, shelter and medicines.
So my main point about this: animal rights was just conceived by humans, but it doesn’t reveal that we should be enslaving them and brutally treating them. We have to be responsible in all our actions because we may not know what might happen someday if these animals became extinct or the time when they evolved to think like us.
The Philosophical Discussion
The discussion that happened in our class paved a way for me to think like and as a philosopher. Many insights were given, and it challenged my mind to formulate questions and answers to that level of thinking. The experience of having the philosophical discussion interested me to the point that the questions presented during the talk baffled my mind on my way home.
I learned a lot of insights, like the probability of humans being herbivores someday and the idea of loving animals at the same time eating them, and at the same time learned morals about the discussion. Because of this, I came into a conclusion that animals rights exist only because of humans, but it doesn’t mean that we should be brutal in handling them.
This discussion, for me, has gains but as well weaknesses. The talk compelled me to think deeper about the topic, which made me think like a philosopher. I also gained the confidence of speaking out my idea about the topic which for me was very minimal because I think I was still in progress of being a confident speaker. The weakness of the discussion is that, the discussion will only heat up if the facilitator (which in this case, Prof. Mendoza), gave commentaries about the question presented.
I think the discussion should be livelier in terms of the exchange of ideas and questions, as well as the method of having the discussion.
In terms of my participation in the class, my assessment would be negative. During my high school days, when we have this kind of talk, I always speak out my opinions and views actively. But during the symposium we had, my shyness overruled me, maybe because I was thinking that my views will be wrong when I say it to the class, and the fact that my classmates think very deeply which obliged me to think like them.
In general, the discussion was very moving and full of ideas and insights about the questions that were given. I’m hoping that these views and opinions would soon become solutions to the problems we are now facing; and I hope that I’ll have the nerve in answering the issues soon.
0 blog comments below