Homework on Regan, The Case for Animal Rights


All answers must be in your own words.

1. Singer and Regan agree on a few main points. What are the main points of agreement? State each in one or two sentences. (2pts)

2. Briefly explain Regan's argument against utilitarianism (in 1-4 sentences). (2pts).

3. According to Regan, some animals matter, morally speaking, and some do not. Please note: you can definitely answer this question from the reading, but Regan doesn't use the exact words I'm using here - you will have to think a bit about what he says to figure this out.
a. Explain his general view on what the difference is between animals that matter and those that do not, in your own words (1pt).
b. Give two examples: an animal that does matter (on his view), morally speaking, and one that does not. (1pt)

4. Give an example of a way of treating non-human animals that Singer would think is morally permissible, but Regan would see as morally wrong. You may use a purely hypothetical example. Briefly explain why they would disagree about the example. (2pts)

5. Take a look at the handout from our class on Singer (this is posted on the course website if you don't have it). On it, I ask you to give a counterexample to either premise 1 or 2 of Singer's argument. a. Give the best counterexample you can here. (1pt)
b. How good is this counterexample - how plausible is it, and how much does it undermine Singer's overall argument? Why? If it is not a very good counterexample, why is there no better one? (1pt)