Do Animal Rights Undermine Human Rights?

Abstract

The proposal to grant rights to non-human animals has raised the question of whether such a step undermines human rights. A first approach claims that animal rights strengthen the protection of human interests since they shift the focus to safeguarding the most vulnerable living beings. On the contrary, a second interpretation maintains that animal rights advocacy introduces a criterion—namely sentience—which does not allow any clear distinction between humans and non-human animals. Therefore, the turn to animal rights would inevitably risk jeopardising the principle of equality of all human beings. The analysis of the most prominent recent philosophical defences of animal rights shows that, in some cases, the criticism is unjustified because the philosophical framework still guarantees a specific status to all humans. However, with regard to other theories—in particular those which put sentience at the centre of their plea—there might be, indeed, some reason for concern. After presenting the different interpretations, the review briefly discusses which approach is most suitable for guaranteeing animal rights on the basis of equal consideration for the common condition of being sentient, while at the same time preserving the human community of the equal rights holders.