Speciesism is about human superiority. We use pesticides, fungicides, kill plants we call weed, and cull animals. Speciesism is the attitude that it is naturally right and appropriate to give priority to human interests and demands over those of all other living creatures. Speciesism has led to endangerment and extinction of many animal species and to extensive environmental damage and depletion. If you believe that certain animals have less right to life and liberty than certain others animals or even humans, or you consider human beings are superior to other animals, then you subscribe to speciesism. Joan Dunayer Defines speciesism as "a failure, in attitude or practice, to accord any nonhuman being equal consideration and respect," and his work critiques speciesism both outside and within the animal rights movement. Mass culling is a classic form of speciesism.
Speciesism is discrimination against certain animal species by humans based on an assumption of human superiority. If you enjoy animal circus or keep birds in a cage then you practice speciesism.
Veganism transcends politics and religion because it is based on the simple matter of rejecting a particular form of prejudice: speciesism. Racism, sexism, speciesism, and other prejudices rely on a morally irrelevant criterion as the basis on which to deny the interests of an individual belonging to a different ‘group’, even if those interests are more significant than one’s own. Speciesism and Veganism: Transcending Politics and Religion.
Speciesism, racism and sexism is widespread we believe they are wrong. Speciesism and racism involve discrimination and exploitation. The Australian ethicist Peter Singer thinks speciesism is very much like racism. But why is speciesism is like racism? Some philosophers have argued discrimination against members of different species is perfectly moral and is not like the injustices caused by racism. Immanuel Kant argues that because animals are not self-conscious, they are there for us as a “means to an end.”
According to Peter Singer, Speciesism is an attitude of bias against a being because of the species to which it belongs. Humans show speciesism when they give less weight to the interests of nonhuman animals than they give to the similar interests of human beings. Philosophical Humanism's concept of individuality excludes non-human animals.
Psychologist Richard Ryder coined the word speciesism in 1970. According to Richard Ryder speciesists draw a sharp moral distinction between humans and all other animals. Peter Singer and Tom Regan define speciesism as bias against all nonhumans. Pure speciesism is the extreme idea of human superiority. In speciesism, the most trivial human wish is more important that the vital needs of other species.
A pure speciesist would argue that it's ok if animals are killed to provide for human beings to wear, fur coat for example. Few people generally take speciesism to this length. They may say that all other things being more or less equal, it's morally correct to take the human side when considering an ethical issue.
What Ryder, Singer, and Regan call ‘speciesism’ is the oldest and most severe form and hence called old speciesism. Old-speciesists don’t believe that any nonhumans should receive as much moral consideration as humans or have basic legal rights, such as rights to life and liberty. Humans generally are old-speciesists. Speciesism examines philosophy, law and activism in terms of three categories: “old speciesism,” “new speciesism,” and “species equality.” Old-speciesists limit rights to humans. Current law is old-speciesist; legally, nonhumans have no rights.
New Speciesism - There is a new trend of people believing that moral and legal rights should extend beyond human species. New-speciesists favour rights for only some nonhumans. New-speciesists believe in a hierarchy with humans at the top.
Nonspeciesism - Nonspeciesists advocate basic rights for all sentient beings. Nonspeciesists want sentience to replace humanness as the basis for rights.
Animal Rights Versus Humanism - The Charge of Speciesism - Kenneth J. Shapiro. The article applies certain concepts of contemporary animal rights philosophy, notably speciesism, to both the philosophy of humanism and humanistic psychology.
Humanism, Racism And Speciesism - Brennan A. Abstract: Scientists are active in promoting the welfare of experimental animals. Does this mean that continued use of animals in science is inconsistent and morally condemnable as speciesism? The paper argues that philosophers' accounts of speciesism and the assimilation of speciesism to racism by Peter Singer and others are not well founded.
Racism is a complex phenomenon, and there is no clear analogy to be
drawn between it and the supposed prejudice of speciesism. The humanist
tradition established in the Renaissance can be a source for an ethic of care for animals,
and regarding humanism simply as a bias or prejudice akin to "speciesism" is
misleading and simplistic.
Humanistic Psychology and Animal Rights: Reconsidering the Boundaries of the
Humanistic Ethic
Melanie Joy, Ph.D., Ed.M.
Speciesism, discrimination against others based on membership in a species, is an ideology
in which countless animals are sacrificed for human ends. Virtually all psychological
paradigms seem to sanction speciesism. This article explores the speciesist underpinnings
of psychological thought and suggests a new paradigm that embraces many humanistic values
with which to appreciate the role of other animals in human psychology and ontology and to
work toward a more nonviolent social order.
Against Strong Speciesism
Donald Graft -
Abstract: Speciesism, difference of treatment based on an appeal to species membership, is
often likened to racism and sexism, and condemned on those grounds. Some philosophers,
however, reject this argument by analogy and instead forward an argument for speciesism
based on a postulated right of species to compete for survival. This paper attacks this
strong form of speciesism by showing that the underlying concept of 'species' is
incoherent in the context of morality, and that strong speciesism has unacceptable
corollaries.
Criticisms of
Speciesism
Waldau, Paul -
Abstract: Criticisms of speciesism by various philosophers provide a test for
assessing limitations of the notion generally. Analogies of speciesism to racism and
sexism are evaluated.
Kant on Duties Regarding Nonrational Nature
Onora O'Neill, Newnham College, Cambridge.
Abstract: Kant's speciesism is not thoroughgoing. He does not view non-rational animals as
mere items for use. He allows for indirect duties 'with regard to' them which afford
welfare but not rights, and can allow for indirect duties 'with regard to' abstract and
dispersed aspects of nature, such as biodiversity, species and habitats.
A Compassionate Autonomy Alternative to Speciesism
Constance K. Perry, Program in Humanities and Sciences, MCP Hahnemann
University, Philadelphia, USA.
Abstract: Many people in the animal welfare community have argued that the use of nonhuman
animals in medical research is necessarily based on speciesism, an unjustified prejudice
based on species membership. As such it is morally akin to racism and sexism. The use of
nonautonomous animals instead of humans in risky research can be based on solid moral
ground. It is not necessarily speciesism.
Expanding The Moral Circle: From Racism to Speciesism
Abstract: This paper reviews the argument by Peter Singer that speciesism, the
exploitation of other species without regard for their interests, is as morally
objectionable as racism and sexism. Peter Singer articulates what he regards as one of the
most fundamental moral failings in the lives of most human beings in terms of the idea of
speciesism. According to Singer Speciesism is a prejudice or attitude of bias
in favour of the interests of member of one’s own species and against those of
members of other species.
Terrorism, racism, speciesism, and sustainable use of the planet -
Author: John Cairns Jr.
Abstract: The 11 September 2001 attacks have seized our attention and undermined our sense of
security. Terrorism is similar to racism and speciesism in that all are expressions
of feelings of superiority over other life forms and that all are incompatible with
sustainable use of the planet. It is proposed that both terrorism
and racism have their genesis in speciesism. Sustainability requires a mutualistic
relationship between humans and the millions of other species that collectively constitute
the planet's ecological life support system.
The Specter of Speciesism - Buddhist and Christian Views of Animals.
Waldau, Paul Assistant Clinical Professor, Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine.
Abstract: This is a study of the ways in which animals have been viewed in the Buddhist
and Christian religious traditions. The concept of speciesism is used to explore basic
questions about which animals, human or otherwise, were significant to early Buddhists and
Christians.
Resisting speciesism and expanding the community of equals.
Bekoff M - BIOSCIENCE 48(8): 638-641, 1998.
The Social Construction of Human Beings and Other Animals in Human-Nonhuman
Relations. Welfarism and Rights: A Contemporary Sociological Analysis. The Social Construction of Human Beings and Other Animals investigates dominant
socially-sedimented attitudes toward human-nonhuman relations. It seeks to examine routine
practices that flow from such social constructions. Human attitudes toward other animals
are socially constructed, institutionalised, widely internalised, and culturally
transmitted across generations. Essentially, the thesis explores many elements of the
social transmission of speciesism.
Animal Revolution Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism by Richard D. Ryder - International Society for Applied Ethology.
The Specter of Speciesism: Buddhist and Christian Views of Animals. Waldau's study assesses the origins of the term “speciesism,” coined by Ryder in 1970, and explores the link between speciesism and slavery, colonization, and the oppression of women and children.
Speciesism, generalized prejudice, and
perceptions of prejudiced others
Jim A. C. Everett, Lucius Caviola,
Julian Savulescu, Nadira S. Faber. Abstract: Philosophers have argued there is
a normative relationship between our attitudes towards animals (“speciesism”)
and other prejudices, and psychological work suggests speciesism relies on
similar psychological processes and motivations as those underlying other
prejudices. But do laypeople perceive such a connection? We compared perceptions
of a target who is high or low on speciesism with those of a target who is high
or low on racism (Studies 1–2), sexism (Study 2), or homophobia (Study 3). We
find that just like racists, sexists, and homophobes, speciesists were both
evaluated more negatively and expected to hold more general prejudicial
attitudes and ideologies (e.g., thought to be higher on SDO and more prejudiced
in other ways). Our results suggest that laypeople seem intuitively aware of the
connection between speciesism and “traditional” forms of prejudice, inferring
similar personality traits and general prejudicial attitudes from a speciesist
just as they do from a racist, sexist, or homophobe.