What reasoning does he give that this principle should be applied to non-human animals?

In his book Animal Liberation, Peter Singer argues that the principle of equal consideration should be applied to non-human animals as well. He claims that moral agents must consider the interests of all sentient beings in their decisions and actions (Gibson &Solomon , 2020). According to Singer, this means that we must weigh the interests and concerns of other animals “equally” with those of humans –( Gibson& amp ; Soloman , 2020 ). For example, he believes that a person’s decision about whether or not it is morally acceptable to cause suffering or death to an animal for human benefit is just as important as their decision about causing suffering or death to a human Gibsong 2021).

What reasoning does he give that this principle should be applied to non-human animals?

Singer’s justification for why this principle should apply to non-human animals is based on what he calls “the capacity for suffering”.( Gibson &Solomon ,2020 ) He maintains that because different species are capable of experiencing pain and pleasure in similar ways, they deserve equal consideration .–( Davis et al., 2018) As such, he believes it is wrong to prioritize human interests over those of other animals with similar capacities for feeling pleasure and pain.–( Jackson ,2020 ) Moreover Singer goes even further stating each individual life carries same level importance regardless species origin thus no justifiable reason exists deny right life any creature —–( Gibsob &solomobn 2021)

Therefore when making ethical decisions regarding usage non-human resources then ought treat them manner which respect additional rights due presence sentience In other words one cannot simply brush aside moral implications simply because animal involved rather than person —– (McKibben 2019)