| DC 欄位 |
值 |
語言 |
| DC.contributor | 哲學研究所在職專班 | zh_TW |
| DC.creator | 王瑞菁 | zh_TW |
| DC.creator | Jui-Ching Wang | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2007-7-11T07:39:07Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2007-7-11T07:39:07Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw:444/thesis/view_etd.asp?URN=93134001 | |
| dc.contributor.department | 哲學研究所在職專班 | zh_TW |
| DC.description | 國立中央大學 | zh_TW |
| DC.description | National Central University | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | 本論文旨在於探討辛格動物解放的倫理觀點及其理論，辛格認為凡是具有感知能力的動物，在道德上都應該平等考量其利益，在利益平等考量之下，以痛苦論證說明目前所採行的工廠式農場及許多的動物實驗都應該廢止。
關於生命價值的高低，辛格採用偏好效益主義的觀點，認為具有自我意識的人格個體其生命價值高於非人格個體。並且以生命的價值說明殺生之錯，以殺生論證進一步說明其動物解放的觀點。
同樣是反對人類中心主義的立場，動物權利論者雷根與環境整體論者羅斯頓對辛格的立場仍有所批評，本論文以辛格的脈落一一作回應。
最後，本論文嘗試以諾丁的關懷倫理學觀點為辛格的效益主義立場作補充，希望能解決效益主義「義務無限擴充」與「簡化親密關係」的問題，擴充辛格的動物解放立場。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The purpose of this thesis is to introduce and discuss Peter Singer’s theory about animal liberation. Singer believes that some animals can suffer, and the avoidance of sufferings is a fundamental interest for being. He uses the “equal consideration of interests” as a basic requirement for equality and the ultimate principle of ethics. In ethical considerations, the same degree of suffering of different species should be taken equally. Intensive animal farming and most animal experiments cause strong pains for the animals only to fulfill minor and trivial interests for human beings. Therefore, intensive animal farming and animal experiments violate an ethical principle, which is the equal consideration of interests.
Regarding the value of lives, Singer takes a preference utilitarian approach. He claims that the self-conscious beings have preferences and those being’s lives should be protected by the ethical principle.
I also discussed criticisms to Singer’s theory, which can be classified into two types: (1) questions from the view that animals have rights, (2) questions from the environmental holism.
The final component of utilitarian morality is the idea that we must treat each person’s welfare as equally important. It has troublesome implications. One problem is that the requirement of “equal concern” places too great a demand on us; another problem is that it disrupts our personal relationships. A more sensible approach might be to say that ethical life includes both caring personal relationships and a benevolent concern for people generally. I took the approach, I would interpret the ethics of care as a supplement to utilitarian theory rather than as a replacement for its. | en_US |
| DC.subject | 人格個體 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 自我意識 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 利益平等考量原則 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 感知能力 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 動物解放 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | Animal Liberation | en_US |
| DC.subject | sentience | en_US |
| DC.subject | person | en_US |
| DC.subject | self-awareness | en_US |
| DC.subject | equal consideration of interests principle | en_US |
| DC.title | 辛格論動物解放 | zh_TW |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | zh-TW |
| DC.title | Peter Singer On Animal Liberation | en_US |
| DC.type | 博碩士論文 | zh_TW |
| DC.type | thesis | en_US |
| DC.publisher | National Central University | en_US |