Animal and Environmental Ethics Essay Example

it violates their rights.

Keeping animals in captivity has a detrimental effect on their wellbeing in various ways. Researchers have observed that animals in captivity often experience boredom and stress, leading to adverse impacts on their overall health. Additionally, the practice of trading or selling animals to other zoos disrupts intergenerational bonds, further exacerbating the challenges faced by these animals. Furthermore, the presence of numerous visitors and the associated financial gain for zoo operators creates a motive to engage in large-scale breeding of animals (Evans 55).

The motivation behind circuses and zoos leads to a potential issue of overpopulation, where animals may be mistreated or even killed. Historical incidents of animal abuse within circuses demonstrate how keeping animals in captivity can create a ripple effect of inhumanity towards them. This practice only fuels people's desire to exploit animals for financial gain. According to virtue ethics, individuals should have personal moral principles that influence their behavior, rather than solely relying on established rules. Early philosophers like Aristotle and David Hume firmly believed that animals possess cognitive abilities, emotions, and even beliefs.

Modern philosophers argue that displaying respect for all aspects of the universe (Cochrane 37) is considered ethical. When adhering to virtue ethics, individuals are advised to exercise moral discernment and behave accordingly. In this circumstance, moral judgment advocates for granting animals the same freedom in their natural habitats as humans experience on earth. It would also be virtuous to contend that it is feasible to observe animals without confining them within zoos. If individuals desire to witness animals, they can visit a sanctuary or observe them in their natural habitat (Evans 92). This approach guarantees the ethical treatment

of animals by upholding their right to freely interact with the world.

Keeping animals in captivity for entertainment or education is unjustifiable. Animals should be allowed to remain free in their natural habitats. The claim that zoos contribute to the conservation of endangered species through safe environments and breeding programs is flawed. Some supporters argue that keeping animals in zoos helps preserve species and serves educational purposes. However, scientific evidence indicates that capturing animals from their natural habitats disrupts the natural breeding process (Cochrane 41), which can potentially harm the wild population as genetic diversity decreases among animals in their natural habitats.

Interfering with the reproduction of animals for educational or entertainment purposes is deemed unethical, as it disrupts their natural breeding process. The endangerment of animals primarily results from human activities, suggesting that there would be no need to keep animals in zoos for educational reasons if humans had acted responsibly. Confining marine animals and other mammals is unjustifiable.

Preserving animals' natural habitats and allowing them to roam freely promotes their natural interaction and breeding. The misconception that confining animals in zoos for protection from predators is inaccurate because animals are naturally adapted to coexist with predators. As a result, it is crucial to uphold the current natural processes involving animals. Ultimately, keeping animals in zoos for educational or entertainment purposes is deemed unethical as it disrupts the natural equilibrium of animal life.

It is crucial to either remove or control zoos in order to guarantee the highest quality of life for animals. It is equally important for humans to show respect for the liberties of all natural living beings.

Works Cited

• Cochrane, A. Animal rights without liberation:
  

Applied ethics and human obligations. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. Print.