The use of animals for scientific research causes numerous debates because of animal suffering, discomfort and importance of the experiment. Researches with animals are provided under controlled conditions, such animals are adapted to the laboratory life (Swart, 2004, 183). The key idea is that such experiments are provided to improve medical progress. From the other side, the use of people for experiments is strongly prohibited, therefore, a limited number of species are used because they have biological and pathological similarity with people. Sufferings in animal experimentation are as low as possible (Swart, 2004, 186). From the other side, animals suffer in natural conditions, they become ill and die. The main idea is that the use of animals for scientific research is not morally wrong action, and utilitarian approach to ethics and Bentham’s Felicific Calculus prove this thesis.
According to utilitarian approach to ethics, the morally right deed is determined by the goodness of its consequences for society, because good for society means good for individuals. The main idea is that utilitarian approach is a philosophy of action and proclaims what individuals should do to improve the situation, what society and each person should do to improve their common well-being (Baujard, 2013, p. 2). Classical utilitarianism directly refers to hedonism and promotes the greatest happiness for most people. Contemporary utilitarianism combines consequences, the welfare of people, and sum-ranking (Baujard, 2013, p. 23). According to this principle, the use of animals for scientific research is morally acceptable because the results of experiments are beneficial for society members and can be used to treat ill people. The utilitarian approach to ethics considers the use of animals for scientific research as morally acceptable because the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcomes and the end justifies the means. Animal testing helps the doctors to reveal safe dose for humans. If to take into account the suffering of people from unknown diseases without effective treatment, it becomes clear why animal testing is considered to be morally acceptable.
Works Cited
Baujard, Antoinette. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism". GATR, 2013, pp. 1-23.
Quinn, Michael. "Bentham on Mensuration: Calculation and Moral Reasoning". Utilitas, vol.
26.1, 2014, pp. 61-104.
Swart, Jac. "The Wild Animal as a Research Animal". Journal of Agricultural and
Environmental Ethics, 17.2, 2004, pp. 181-197.
