Peter Singer’s Speciesist Notion of Animal Conservation  Vis-a-Vis Genetic Manipulation

Gabriel Bubu Ncha; Emmanuel E. Etta; Lawrence Odey Ojong

doi:10.21697/seb.5837

Published: 2025-01-04

Vol. 23 No. 1 (2025)

Peter Singer’s Speciesist Notion of Animal Conservation Vis-a-Vis Genetic Manipulation

Gabriel Bubu Ncha

, Emmanuel E. Etta

, Lawrence Odey Ojong

Studia Ecologiae et Bioethicae

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.21697/seb.5837

Abstract

This paper shows how human activity through genetic engineering causes pain to non-human animals. It primarily deals with an evaluation of the phenomenon of animal rights (specifically animal conservation) from the view of Singer’s notion of speciesism. Singer’s notion of speciesism frowns at all forms of animal maltreatment and emphasizes that animals are sentients, and they are capable of suffering and feeling pain. The central problem here is whether animal’s life has intrinsic value and whether they can be used for experiment. Among the several ways by which speciesism is practiced, this work identified genetic engineering as a major obstacle to animal conservation because humans will invade the animal space to look for various animal species to carry out experiment on. Using the method of critical analysis, evaluation and prescription, the paper argues that animals have life and belong to the environment and as such, the environment should be conserved also for their sake and if humans continue to exploit the environment by using animals for genetic manipulations, there will be negative consequences to humans and extinction of some species.

Keywords:

speciesism, conservation, genetic engineering, animal rights, Singer Peter

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Ncha, G. B., Etta, E. E., & Ojong, L. O. (2025). Peter Singer’s Speciesist Notion of Animal Conservation Vis-a-Vis Genetic Manipulation. Studia Ecologiae Et Bioethicae, 23(1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.21697/seb.5837

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Asthana, D. K., and Meera Asthana. 2012. Environment: Problems and Solution. New Delhi: S. Chand & Company Ltd.
Google Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy. 1994. “Interest of the Inferior Animal.” In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 361-372. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Google Scholar

Conway, Ruth. 2000. “Ethical Judgements in Genetic Engineering: The Implications for Technology Education.” International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10: 239–254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008964405014
Google Scholar

Das, R. C. and D. K. Behera. 2008. Environmental Science: Principles and Practice. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited.
Google Scholar

Descartes, Rene. 1994. “The Difference between Men and Animals.” In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 359-360. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Google Scholar

Feinberg, Joel. 1994 “The Rights of Animal and Unborn Generations”. In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 364-374. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Google Scholar

Fuller, R. C. 1979. Good News Bible: With Deuterocanonical Books/Apocrypha. Today’s English Version. India: Swapna Printing Works Pvt. Ltd.
Google Scholar

Gillam, Lynn, Zeffie Poulakis, S. Tobin, and Melissa Wake. 2006. “Enhancing the Ethical Conduct of Genetic Research: Investigating Views of Parents on including their Healthy Children in a Study on Mild Hearing Loss.” Journal of Medical Ethics 32(9): 537-541. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2005.013201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2005.013201
Google Scholar

Hume, David. 1994. “Of the Reason of Animals”. In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 305-371. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Google Scholar

Hutchins, Michael, and Christen Wemmer. 1987. “Wildlife Conversation and Animal Rights: Are they Compatible?” In Advances in Animal Welfare Science, edited by M. W. Fox et al. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3331-6_10
Google Scholar

Nasi, Robert, David Brown, David Wilkie, Elisabeth Bennett, Caroline Tutin, Gijs van Tol, and Tim Christophersen. 2018. Conservation and use of Wildlife-Base Resources: The Bushmeat Crisis. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Google Scholar

Nicholl, Desmond S. T. 2008. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering. Third Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Ojong, Kyrian A. 2018. “Environmental Sustainability in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects.” 5th National Conference of Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP), 4th–7th September, 17-25.
Google Scholar

Ojong, Lawrence Odey. 2019a. “A Resolution of the Ethical Challenge of Animal Rights.” Calabar Journal of Philosophy and Leadership Studies: Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 1(1): 59-70.
Google Scholar

Ojong, Lawrence Odey. 2019b. “Singer’s Notion of Speciesism: A Case for Animal Rights in Ejagham Culture.” International Journal of Environmental Pollution and Environmental Modelling 2 (3): 12-17.
Google Scholar

Ojong, Lawrence Odey. 2022. “The Effects of Man’s Activities on the Environment and Humanity: The Way Forward.” Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 13 (1): 57-63. https://doi.org/10.62865/bjbio.v13i1.32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62865/bjbio.v13i1.32
Google Scholar

Omoogun, Ajayi C. 2009. Ethics & Environment: Issue and Perspectives. Calabar: Baye Communications.
Google Scholar

Patra, Satyajit, and Araromi Adewale Andrew. 2005. “Effects of Genetic Engineering - The Ethical and Social Implications.” iMedPub Journals 3(1): 1-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21767/2386-5180.10005
Google Scholar

Peschike, Karl H. 2009. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the light of Vatican II, Vol. 11 3rd ed. Bungalore: Theological Publication in India.
Google Scholar

Regan, Tom. 1994. “The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism.” In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 382-395. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Google Scholar

Ritchie, David G. 1994. “Only humans have Rights.” In Applied Social and Political Philosophy, edited by Elizabeth Smith and H. Gene Blocker, 362-364. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. 1997. “All Animals are Equal.” In Morality in Practice, edited by James P. Sterba, 457-468. Stamford: International Thomson Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. 2001a. “All Animals are Equal.” In Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, edited by Michael E. Zimmerman, J. Baird Collicott, George Sessions, Karen J. Warren, and John Clark, 26-40. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. 2001b. “Animal.” In A Companion to Environmental Philosophy, edited by Dale Jamieson, 416-425. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. 2015. Animal Liberation: The Definitive Classic of the Animal Right Movement. 40th Anniversary Edition with a new Preface by the Author. New York: Open Road Integrated media, Inc.
Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. 2016. “Afterword.” In The Ethics of Killing Animals, edited by Tatjana Visak and Robert Garner, 229-235. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Ukwetang, John Okpa, Edidiong Okon Akpan-Abasi, and Peter Ukwondi Agba. 2014. Our Environment: Awareness and Management. Calabar: Ushie Printing and Publishing Co.
Google Scholar