Virtue theory response to the treatment of animals (12)

Aristotle’s virtue theory claims that an action is only right if it is an action that a virtuous person
would carry out in the same circumstances. A virtuous person is a person who acts virtuously, a
person acts virtuously if they “possess and live the virtue” in other words, have positive character
traits. A virtue is a moral characteristic that a person needs to live well and to live well one needs to
know their purpose and the means to achieve it. Once you know this and you know the best way to
achieve it, then keep doing it and if you are good then others should follow this as well.

Now when considering whether the way we treat animals is morally right or wrong we must
consider a few virtues that humans should have and how they apply to animal treatment.

In this instance Animal Experimentation, firstly we must assess the temperance and the mean of
animal experimentation. We must ask if a.e is an indulgent or callous act? Some may say it depends
on the type of a.e. Non-therapeutic for instance, the use of animals for the test of cosmetic products
may be considered indulgent. Therefore, it would be immoral. Even if it for good reason and the
scientist is completely unattached and unfeeling for the animal or process it may encourage a
certain callousness which would be unacceptable. Also, a disregard for animals could be developed,
possible leading to a disregard of humans in time?

Some might argue if AE is being carried out for good cause with concern for the wellbeing of the
animal then it is a temperate act, an indulgent act. Especially if all alternatives had been exhausted.

Secondly, courage. Some may say it is courageous of the scientists to experiment on animals due to
some recent violent attacks on colleagues by activists. Therefore, the fact they are willing to carry on
this research is commendable. Although you could say the activists, people who are prepared to
speak out against this cruelty and disregard are equally courageous if not more so. One of the main
problems of virtue ethics if how you interpret it.

Thirdly, justice. Is AE a justifiable act? Many may say that experimentation on animals is basically
favouring human interests over animal's wellbeing, (Singer would say this is speciesism.)
It could be argued that if it is being done for the benefits of all humans then it is just to humans.
Could be defended using the 3R's - refinement, reduction and replacement. If all is being done to
accommodate these three things regarding AE, then it could be seen as just as the intention is to
limit suffering and work towards advancement of human life. Although is this what virtue ethics is
about? Eudaimonia does not necessarily mean the absence of suffering in human life.