Question

please give me a detailed answer on how Carl Cohen would feel on animal rights, and overall how he is as a philosopher please be THREE paragraphs

Answer 1

• Carl Cohen claims that we do not violate the rights of nonhuman animals by doing research them.His idea of a right is that right are precious; they are dispositive; they count.Carl Cohen rejects arguments by those who favor severely curbing or eliminating animal experimentation, then defends the position that we have a strong duty to conduct such experiments to alleviate human suffering and extend human lives.
• In conclusion to Cohen’s argument he does state that we benefit from animal research but he also admits animals feel pain and that researchers should not subject them to unnecessary harm.He also acknowledges we can use alternative methods instead of using inhumane treatment on animals forcing researches to treat the animals with the correct morals.
• Cohen argues that animals have no rights – a right properly understood is a claim or potential claim, that one party may exercise against another. Rights arise and can be defended only among beings who actually do or can make moral claims against one another. Therefore, rights are necessarily human and their possessors are persons, human beings.
• He offers different stands on his argument;on one side he says that animals do not have rights and then he says we should not experiment on them but for human survival he supports experimentation just not in severe form.
• So,by that logic if animals do not have rights,in conducting research on animal subjects, therefore, we do not violate their rights because they have none to violate. Animals lack the capacity for free moral judgment. They are not beings of a kind capable of exercising or responding to moral claims.   Animals, therefore, have no rights, and they can have none.
• The grounds of our obligations to humans and to animals are complicated. Some hold that there is a general obligation to do no gratuitous harm to sentient creatures; some hold that there is a general obligation to do good to sentient creatures when it is reasonably within our power to do so. In dealing with animals, most people will agree that we are at least obliged to act humanely and treat them with decency and concern because they are sentient creatures. To treat animals humanely, however, is not to treat them as humans or as the holders of rights.