Our Ethical Obligations to Animals

The question of the ethical obligations we hold to animals is one that has fuelled a lot of intense debates. The primary considerations involved relate to how one ought to treat animals. Treating animals ethically imply that they are accorded humane treatment, free from cruelty or harm to their lives. In turn, animals with a gentle nature endear themselves to us, owing to their pleasantness. While most people maintain this to be true, it is an observable fact that most of us demonstrate a quirky attitude in our treatment of animals. People demonstrate a strange liking to animals which exert a higher moral price on our liking them while being averse to others which do not place a similar burden on us. This strange juxtaposition is what Hal Herzog talks about in his article Animals like us. The Dalai Lama in his article Ethics and the New Genetics chooses to focus on the moral and ethical considerations of human life. In studying the ethical obligations that we place upon ourselves by choosing to stay with animals, we can apply the Dalai Lama’s thoughts on the matter. Human interaction with animals should be guided by our ethical obligations as well as moral responsibility, as it is only through this means that we will be able to derive maximum benefit from this interaction.

Man has a moral responsibility for his actions in the treatment of animals and with it an obligation to ensure such an interaction remains within the confines of human decency. People keep animals for a wide variety of reasons. The principal considerations that are most apparent are for the pleasure of their company as pets, for food, and for scientific study. Medical research is probably the most important as well as controversial reason for human-animal interaction. There is a demonstrated basic kinship between man and animal, a fact that is exploited in the undertaking of a scientific study of the inner working of the human body. In the course of the investigations, animals are usually subjected to acts which in as much as they may be necessary, are grisly. It was with this in mind that Herzog recognizes the effect that of this gruesome interaction with his animal study subjects was having on Ron. According to Herzog, when Ron’s students offered to carry out the procedures on his behalf, noting the toll they were obviously taking on him, he turned them down. “Ron refused, unwilling to dodge the moral consequences of his research” (245) To Ron, he held the responsibility for the procedure, and it was on him to bear the burden. In his article, the Dalai Lama recognizes this intermittent possibility, and as opposed to writing it off as a quirk, the Dalai Lama maintains that it is, in fact, a good thing. He advances that “we must be willing to be revolted when science-or for that matter any human activity-crosses the line of human decency, and we must fight to retain the sensitivity that is otherwise so easily eroded” (139). According to the Dalai Lama, human sensitivity is a desirable quality and one we should not dispense with even where the benefits of a procedure are clearly evident. In his view, we should also be cautious so as to not transcend decency in pursuit of scientific study. He further advances that the willingness cross over such lines would likely lead to the commission of horrifying atrocities and should, therefore, be avoided.

Individual considerations for any one species should not trump that of other species, even where we derive more satisfaction from our interaction with the first species. Most people who keep pets do so for the companionship that they offer. Regardless, there is a recognizable bias between how people select what animals to keep as pets. Herzog identifies just such a prejudice when he notes that cats, much unlike snakes, kill other animals for sport and an estimated one billion small animals are killed each year by cats. This fact is brought into startling fact if we contrasted cats with snakes. Snakes consume only a fraction of that which cats consume, but this has in no way contributed to the popularity as pets. Herzog notes that “Objectively, the moral burden of enjoying the company of a cat is 10 times higher than that of living with a pet snake” (245). In his view, the enjoyment that we derive from or interaction with cats accounts for our preference of the felines over snakes as pets. He advances that cats, being the most sociable creatures, have more demands on us which we are willing to accommodate owing to their friendly nature. The Dalai Lama offers a different opinion on the matter. In his view, all our actions should be guided by a “recognition of the preciousness of life, an understanding of the need for balance in nature and the employment of this need as a gauge for the direction of our thought and action” (139).What the Dalai Lama hopes to drive across is that our individual reasons or consideration for one animal should not take precedence over the moral obligation to other species. He urges that compassion should guide our actions and be our guiding motivation. According to him, all forms of life are equally precious and as such we should not let our love for an individual species be the basis for failing in the ethical obligation to other species. To him, the long-term consequences should be the determining factor in any such interaction.

While the question of the choice of food is an individual one, ethical concerns and regard for the preciousness of life should underpin any such considerations. One other consequence of the interaction between the species is food. Man has a wide tastes in food, governed in no small part by the varied palates between individuals. Food sources, in particular, those derived from animals, draw mixed sentiments from those involved. Where some advance the richness of animals as a food source, others are vehemently opposed to the whole idea. Herzog recognizes this as one of the many manifestations of the quirkiness of human behavior on the subject of animals. Some people advance that they cannot eat certain foods because of the ethical considerations involved. Herzog makes note of Judy, who decided against eating animals just because they taste good, although she maintained a diet comprising of fish. It was left to her husband to point out that “there is not a shred of moral difference between eating a Cornish hen and eating a Chilean sea bass” (242). From a biological perspective, both these animals are the same; both are vertebrates, have brains, and lead social lives. In effect, it makes little sense to refuse to eat one while maintaining an active diet comprised of the other.  The Dalai Lama points to the necessity for applying universal ethical principles to this debate. Accordingly, these principles should “include a recognition of the preciousness of life…. and ensure that we hold compassion as the key motivation for all our endeavors” (139). Food choices, he maintains should not be separated from any such ethical concerns that we might have. Instead, ethics should help us to come to the realization of the sanctity of life, and let this be the guiding principle as we make our choices. Where it concerns food, especially those derived from animal sources, the value of life should be given prime importance. The food choice, therefore, becomes a question of both one’s individual preference as well as any moral considerations.

To conclude, an exercise of our moral obligations to animals will ensure that the interaction derives maximum value, and without compromising our morality. Our infinitely greater capacity for language, culture, and ethical judgment places us as humans on an alternate moral plane from that of the other species of animals. With the recognition of this, it becomes apparent that the greater knowledge and power we have, the greater the need for moral responsibility for our actions. We have the duty to ensure our interaction with the animals remains within the bounds of human decency, that we treat no individual species with preference over the others, and that these ethical obligations guide our every interaction with the species. Considerations for our ethical obligations to the animals assures the sustained interaction between our different species.