Anti-speciesism and vegetarianism are being promoted as projects for the entire society. Several political parties have lately formed under this umbrella. An ethical system must not be constructed on a visible rejection of reality if it is to become more than a simple mental game and instead a societal endeavour. It has to be applicable in the real world.
Peter Singer, the originator of anti-speciesism, claims to have developed a logical approach to the animal situation based on Jeremy Bentham's utilitarian moral theory, which was formed in the 18th century. Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept that promotes a duty - based approach to morality. Each activity must be assessed in terms of its impact on the overall well-being of the community.
Singer's key contribution is that he redefined the moral community's identity. He believes that no human should be left out. As a result, identifying a trait that is present in all individuals without exception is required. The only feasible selection criterion, according to Singer, is the ability to suffer, or sensitivity, which is equally shared by all individuals. Because animals have this ability as well, Singer contends that they must be included in our moral realm.
Speciesism is defined as discrimination based only on species membership. Speciesism is when you eat a hot dog while petting a cat. It entails using animal-tested cosmetics while your dog is being groomed.
Anti-speciesism is recognizing that dogs and pigs have the same desire to be free of pain, and not eating one while admiring the other. Anti-speciesism is the belief that all suffering is equal, regardless of the individual's species membership.
Anti-speciesism does not imply that carrots, flies, pigs, and people should all be treated the same (even though, yes, they all belong to different biological species). Anti-speciesism merely asks that the same interests, or interests of similar strength, be taken into consideration to the same amount.
