Reagan critiques/rejects three different ideas reefing to the rights and place of Animals. In the indirect duty approach, humans have no duties towards animals, but to other humans concerned because of animals. Regain argues this approach to be invalid because torturing animals does not just hurt humans. In the second approach he explained the cruelty kindness view. This view holds that our behavior towards animals is fine as long as we aren’t cruel towards them. An action may be kind but it may not be right either. Lastly, he describes the utilitarian approach. This approach says that animals interests should be the same as human interests. It also believes to do the act that best balances between satisfaction and frustration. Reagan does however find to flaws with this view. It denies that individuals have inherent values. And also that any action can be justified if the end result is good (Aunt Bee example).
Reagan counters these views with his own thoughts. He argues that everyone (including animals) has inherent value and that it is wrong to treat anyone with value as a resource (exploit them). He also talks about right acts, which basically means treating all individuals with respect and not using them for some other gain.
One thing Reagan’s argument fails to explain is the idea that can’t someone be really concerned about the well-being of animals but at the same time use animals for human means (as a pet).
I think we may have touched on this topic in class. I think Regan would disprove of domestication of animals (pets) because it is infringing on their rights to freedom. Regan would point out that if domesticating a human as a “pet” and taking the human as your own property would be wrong, doing the same to an animal would also be wrong.