England: The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?

WAV Comment – for as long as I can personally remember, The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? – has been something that has run through the British animal rights movement; a statement on which so many campaigns and offensives have been based.  It has appeared on everything over the years; the words of an English animal rights campaigner as far back as the 1700’s – one Jeremy Bentham.

Yes, animals can suffer and do STILL suffer; little changes – unfortunately; some centuries later, man still decides to make animals suffer by presenting and incarcerating them into the cage age system.  The man was a visionary; sadly mankind has not progressed in some areas that well.

Regards Mark

Jeremy Bentham on Cruelty to Animals | Robin Saikia

Jeremy Bentham on Cruelty to Animals

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) was an English philosopher, jurist and social reformer. He was the founding father of modern utilitarianism, a doctrine founded on his belief that “it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong”. Bentham is also remembered for his lifelong commitment to prison reform and for his views on animal rights. As regards animals, Bentham strongly opposed the widespread view, advanced by Descartes and others, that animals were mere automata, complex but soulless machines, incapable of suffering. The following brief passage, from Bentham’s The Principles of Morals and Legislation, can be fairly described as a cornerstone of the modern animal rights movement.

The day may come when the rest of animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may one day come to be recognized that the number of legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month old. But suppose they were otherwise, what would it avail? 

The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s