Peter Singer 動物解放理論引領當代動物權運動。Singer 採取古典效益主義的結果論，主張：一般人都承認種族主義以及性別主義是不道德的，因為它們已違反了利益平等原則；依此理路，物種主義 (speciesism) 也是不道德的，因為物種主義也已違反了利益平等原則。另一位哲學家 Tom Regan 則採取非結果論的進路來替動物權辯護。他主張：我們之所以要保護動物，乃是因為動物和人一樣也擁有不可侵犯的權利（rights）。動物之所以擁有不可侵犯的權利，乃是因為牠們具有「固有價值 (inherent value)」，而動物之所以具有「固有價值」，是因於動物實乃為一「生命主體 (subject-of-a-life)」。本研究將分析、討論 Singer 與Regan 之學說，並分別指出兩家理論的優點及其限制，基於此，試圖援用「 interest」概念，以期建構出一套較為廣包的說法，以融攝Singer 動物解放理論與Regan 動物權學說所呈顯的（部分）真理。Peter Singer’s theory of animal liberation is regarded as the theoretical ground of the modern animal right movement. Singer argues for animal liberation as the following. In general, racism and sexism cannot be morally accepted, because they violate the basic principle of equality. Given this, speciesism cannot be morally accepted either. For it violates the basic principle of equality too. Tom Regan, on the other hand, argues: we ought to protect animals from human maltreatment because they also have rights. Indeed, he adds, any subject-of-a-life has inherent “value” and thus has rights. This project aims to analyze and discuss Singer’s theory of animal liberation and Regan’s thesis of animal right。Based on this, I want to show the advantages and limitations of the tow theories. And then, I will try to raise a more inclusive account in order to more reasonably explain why we ought to treat animals more kindly. 研究期間：10008 ~ 10107
