What It means To Be Human, Book Review

Joanna Bourke's new book is "What It means To Be Human." On Page 68, she discusses Peter Singer's observation on animals feeling pain. He says, "Whether or not dogs and pigs are persons, they can certainly feel pain and suffer in a variety of ways, and or concern for their suffering should not depend on how rational and self-aware they might be."

Wouldn't that same description apply as well to human children up to six months old? Peter Singer advocates allowing parents of children born with severe disabilities to kill their children in the name of "increasing happiness" in the world. Are we to believe that the child does not suffer pain, if he or she is killed humanely?

On page 69 Bourke says "this philosophical approach is called 'preference utilitarianism.' Ethical behavior must arise from a consideration of the greatest satisfaction of desires or preferences. The morally correct action is that which produces the most favorable consequences for those involved."

How does that apply to the children up to six months of age that may be killed to make the world a "happier" place? Are the dead children happier too? The above argument ('preference utilitarianism') could be applied to any minority that decreases the "happiness" of the majority.

* * *
On page 67 Bourke says quoting the 'Ernest Englishwoman,' "If women were allowed to become animal in law, then their status and wellbeing would improve."

That same argument can still be applied to men and women in the USA today. When scientists use human subjects for experimentation (medical research) they must comply with the laws on such activities. US law requires consent, and some restrictions. But if the researchers do not comply with the laws there are no penalties. Title 45 Section 46 Code of Federal Regulations.

The (US) Animal Welfare Act of 1966 provides prison and fines for non compliance when animals are used for research. So again, or still, animals have greater legal protections than humans. In this case women are treated equally to men.

The City of Cambridge MA USA has an animal research officer to make certain that animals are protected. But humans are not under her jurisdiction. There is no human subject research officer for the City. Once again animals have greater legal protections than human women and men.