The Blog

NoodleFood

Podcast #67: Animal Rights, Global Warming, Spousal Consent, and More

 Posted by on 5 April 2011 at 7:00 am  Podcasts
Apr 052011
 

On Sunday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, Greg Perkins and I answered questions on animal rights, treating animals humanely, global warming, spousal consent for sterilization, criticisms of Objectivism, indulging emotions, and more. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading.

You can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:


Whole Podcast: 3 April 2011

Listen or Download:

Remember the Tip Jar!

The mission of Philosophy in Action is to spread rational principles for real life… far and wide. That’s why the vast majority of my work is available to anyone, free of charge. I love doing the radio show, but each episode requires an investment of time, effort, and money to produce. So if you enjoy and value that work of mine, please contribute to the tip jar. I suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. In return, contributors can request that I answer questions from the queue pronto, and regular contributors enjoy free access to premium content and other goodies.


Podcast Segments: 3 April 2011

You can download or listen to my answers to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction

My News of the Week: My current projects include my April 13th Webcast on Cultivating Moral Character and revisions to Explore Atlas Shrugged.

Question 1: Animal Rights

Question: Do animals have rights? If not, why not? Given that we don’t need to eat animals to survive, shouldn’t we be vegetarians or vegans? Also, if animals don’t have rights, are people then entitled to do whatever they please with animals that they own?

My Answer, In Brief: The claims of animal rights are based on false understanding of the nature and basis of rights. While cruelty to or neglect of animals is deplorable, government should not become involved unless the rights of some person are violated.

Listen or Download:

Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Treating Animals Humanely

Question: What does it mean to treat an animal humanely? The term “humanely” when applied to animals is confusing to me. More generally, what is the proper moral treatment of animals?

My Answer, In Brief: To treat an animal humanely means to act in a benevolent way toward it. A person ought to act toward animals in such a way that respects the nature of the animal and the context of the interaction, in pursuit of his own self-interest. Generally, particularly with domesticated animals, that means acting kindly but firmly. Brutality toward animals is often ineffective, dangerous, and reveals moral depravity.

Listen or Download:

Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Global Warming

Question: How should I deal with the idea of man-made global warming? What is the proper approach to the whole idea? I can’t decide on my own whether it’s true or false without educating myself in climatology. And how should I treat others who believe in it just because many university professors do?

My Answer, In Brief: Global warming is a scientific matter, and scientists would have to know far more than they do now before recommending any course of action to anyone. In any case, the solution is not more government controls, but rather more freedom for human invention and technology.

Listen or Download:

Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: Spousal Consent for Sterilization

Question: Should spousal consent be required for sterilization procedures? A fairly well-known mommy blogger recently revealed that she was required to sign a consent form for her husband’s vasectomy. Reading through some of the remarks on her blog, many of her commenters seem to support such a practice, believing that a person has a right to be involved in the reproductive decisions of his/her spouse. I think it’s a violation of individual rights, and having had a sterilization procedure myself, I’d have been BEYOND upset if my spouse had been required to give his consent. He was in agreement with my decision, but I can’t help but wonder what happens in situations where a person does not want his/her spouse to have a vasectomy, tubal ligation, etc. Any thoughts?

My Answer, In Brief: As a matter of law, spousal consent should not be required for any medical procedure. However, a doctor might want such consent to protect his own reputation, given that he knows that married couples are too often not honest with each other.

Listen or Download:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 5: Criticisms of Objectivism

Question: What do you think about Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality: A Critique of Ayn Rand’s Epistemology by Scott Ryan? I came across the book on Amazon, and I was wondering if it’s worth reading. Would it change my view about Objectivism?

My Answer, In Brief: While criticisms of a philosophy are often useful for ensuring that you’ve not overlooked some critical issue, the true test of a philosophy is the facts of reality. Also, Objectivism is too young of a philosophy to have attracted much well-aimed criticism.

Listen or Download:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 6: Indulging Emotions

Question: How do you change from being an emotionalist to being rational? I have the tendency to reminisce on fantasies and memories of martyrdom. I do it because it gives me a emotional surge of ecstasy and heartache. For example, I fantasize about telling the people who mistreated me so badly in Army Basic Training about what that was like for me. This indulgence is costing me my mind. I want to be emotionally competent. Any advice on how to be level-headed lucid/rational thinker, and stop the habit of indulging my emotions?

My Answer, In Brief: Stop whining and make a serious commitment to change!

Listen or Download:

Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion

Be sure to check out the topics scheduled for upcoming episodes! Don’t forget to submit and vote on questions for future episodes too!

  • Start Time: 1:02:25


About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio focuses on the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. It broadcasts live on most Sunday mornings and many Thursday evenings over the internet. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedsPhilosophy in Action's Calendar


 Podcast #67: Animal Rights, Global Warming, Spousal Consent, and More  Add comments
   
Home | Live | Podcasts | Blog | Queue | Connect | Contribute | Search
Copyright Diana Hsieh | Web | Email | Twitter | Facebook

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedsPhilosophy in Action's Calendar
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha