Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseHumans have more power over the Earth than any other species. Most people agree that this power brings a duty of care. They give different reasons why.
Key terms:
Many religions teach that the world belongs to God, not to people. Humans are its stewards or trustees, and many believers expect to answer to God for how they treated it. Many religions also teach respect for all life: every living thing has value, so harming nature carelessly is wrong.
Humanists and other non-religious people care for the planet without believing it has an owner. They point to the needs of future generations, who deserve a healthy planet too. They point to self-interest: people need clean air, water and food, so harming the Earth harms us. And many say nature has value in itself, for its beauty and its variety of life.
Two of the biggest problems today are climate change and the loss of wildlife. Burning coal, oil and gas releases gases that warm the planet. Clearing forests and polluting land and sea destroys the places where animals and plants live. People can respond at different levels.
Using less energy, wasting less, recycling, and thinking about what you buy and eat.
Joining or giving to an environmental group, signing petitions, and asking leaders and companies to change.
Planting trees, cleaning up beaches and rivers, and supporting nature reserves that protect animals in danger of dying out.
Passing laws against pollution, protecting land and sea, and making agreements between countries. In the Paris Agreement of 2015, countries agreed to work to limit global warming.
Commonality means what all living beings have in common. Remember that the theory of evolution says humans share their origins with every other species. Most scientists and many believers accept this. Many animals can also feel pain and fear, as humans can. Some religions teach a deep link between all living beings too. If we are this alike, many people argue, animals deserve care and respect.
Humans are clearly the most powerful species. Some religions teach that God gave humans dominion over other creatures. Believers read this in different ways. Some say it allows humans to use animals for their needs. Many others say dominion means caring rule, like stewardship, not a licence to be cruel.
Critics call the belief that humans always come first speciesism. The philosopher Peter Singer, who made the word well known, compares it to racism or sexism: an unfair bias in favour of your own group.
Most people eat meat and see this as natural. Many object to factory farming, where animals are kept indoors in crowded spaces. Some people are vegetarian or vegan, for religious or moral reasons.
Animals are used to test new medicines. Supporters say this saves human lives. Opponents say it causes suffering to creatures that cannot agree to it. Many more people oppose testing for cosmetics, where no life is at stake.
Most people accept keeping pets if they are well cared for. Sports are more divisive. Some defend hunting or horse racing as tradition. Others say that making animals suffer for fun is wrong.
Humans may use animals for food, work or research, but must avoid needless suffering. A welfare supporter might eat meat but insist on kind farming.
Animals are not ours to use. Just as it would be wrong to experiment on a person without consent, it is wrong to do it to an animal. A rights supporter is likely to be vegan and to oppose all animal testing.
Utilitarians give a third angle. The philosopher Jeremy Bentham said the question about animals is not whether they can reason or talk, but whether they can suffer. For a utilitarian, suffering counts whoever feels it, human or animal. So an action that causes great animal suffering for a small human gain is wrong.
Here is a one-line taste of each religion. Your own religion's lesson will teach it properly.
Do not treat animal welfare and animal rights as the same thing. Welfare allows humans to use animals kindly. Rights says animals should not be used at all. Do not write that dominion means humans can do as they like, because many believers read it as a duty of care.
What comes next: your own religion's lesson on this topic teaches in detail what its followers believe about caring for the planet and for animals.
Paper 1 style question. Parts (a) and (b) test AO1. Parts (c) and (d) test AO1 and AO2.
(a) Identify three ways in which human beings use animals. [3 marks]
(b) Outline two reasons why some people believe human beings have a responsibility for the planet. [4 marks]
(c) Explain why there are different views about how human beings should treat animals. [6 marks]
(d) 'Animals should have the same rights as human beings.' Evaluate this statement, showing you have considered different points of view. In your answer you should refer to at least one religion. [12 marks]
(a) 1. For food (1). 2. In experiments to test medicines (1). 3. As pets (1).
(b) Some religious people believe humans are stewards of the planet (1), because the world belongs to God and they must look after it on his behalf (1). Some non-religious people believe we owe a duty to future generations (1), because the people who come after us will need clean air, water and wildlife as much as we do (1).
(c) Some people believe humans have dominion over animals. This means humans are more important, so it is acceptable to use animals for food or medical research when it helps people.
Others stress the commonality of all living beings. The theory of evolution says humans share their origins with other species, and many animals can feel pain as we do. This means their suffering matters, so cruelty cannot be excused.
These starting points lead to different positions. Supporters of animal welfare accept the use of animals if needless suffering is avoided. Supporters of animal rights believe animals should not be used at all, because putting humans first is speciesism. Utilitarians judge each case by the total suffering it causes.
(d) Plan. For: animals can suffer, and a utilitarian says suffering counts whoever feels it; humans and animals share common origins, so drawing a sharp line is speciesism; many religions teach respect for all life.
Against: many religious people believe humans have a special place and dominion over animals; humans can reason and make moral choices, and rights go with duties that animals cannot have; some human rights, such as the right to vote or to an education, make no sense for animals; animal welfare protects animals from cruelty without giving them the same rights.
Your religion: add teachings from your own religion, by name, on the side they fit.
Possible conclusion: judge each point as you go, then pick a side. For example: I disagree with the statement, because animals deserve protection from needless suffering, but that is a case for good welfare or for some rights, not for the same rights as humans.
In part (d), look hard at the word 'same'. You can argue that animals should have some rights without agreeing that they should have the same rights as humans.