|
Point Of View! with Barb Sumner Burstyn
Does my dog have a soul? -
September 2002
 At
an Animal Welfare conference in September, New Zealand author
Richard Webster declared his dog Bruce had a soul.
Bruce, said Webster, experienced joy, sadness and jealousy and
had a reasoning ability. Webster's comments sounded quaint and
a little dippy and you could just see him looking deep into Bruce's
eyes when he made the discovery. But however Webster came to his
conclusion he is, perhaps unwittingly, echoing the 'personhood'
debate currently firing philosophers round the world.
Quietly behind the scenes across the United Sates and Britain
lawyers and philosophers are debating the upgrading of animals
to human status. Forefront of this new 'personhood' trend is Peter
Singer the Australian philosopher who is committed to breaking
the automatic nexus between species membership and moral status.
According to Singer it's not enough to accord animals the full
rights of humans - some humans might not even qualify as 'persons'
at all. Especially if they are brain damaged or just not wanted.
Singer, who makes it clear he does not particularly like animals,
has taken the naive discussion of animal lovers like Webster and
developed it exponentially.
We are, he says, simply being speciesist when we drip detergent
on to a rabbit's eye rather than carrying out the same experiment
on a human patient in a persistent-vegetative state. He likens
it to racism - giving preference to one group over another because
of race membership.
According to Singer the only moral boundary is the capacity to
suffer; while being rational or cognitive is irrelevant.
Frightening and improbable?
Well take a look at how we're all sliding gradually towards Singers
views.
Recently the SPCA in Vancouver, Canada urged that a dog owner
be charged with psychological abuse and His Holiness the Pope
said not only are animals as ensouled as we are but they are far
superior to human beings in their loyalty and trust and lack of
artifice. Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Irvin Wolkoff recently described
the relationship between a human and their pet as far less complicated
and far more satisfying than the relationship between two humans.
While New York animal physic Joanna Seere helps animals find balance,
wholeness and themselves through meditation and the payment of
US$90. She's so busy it takes weeks to get an appointment. In
the UK Morgan Stanley Dean Witter& Co recently ranked pet
health insurance above pensions in importance while a US hotel
chain has introduced a Privileged Paws frequent-stay programme
featuring fluoride enriched water bowls and free in-room meals.
Then of course there are pet products galore - everything from
jewellery to organic food to pyjamas and perfume.
So whether Richard Webster intended it or not his declaration
of Bruce's human-like attributes of cognition, autonomy and self-awareness
puts us all in a difficult situation.
Does an animal sharing these human-like traits reveal a soul
and if so does that confer personhood? If you do think your dog
has a soul then you have to consider your moral obligations to
all equally ensoled creatures. While the need to protect animals
from cruelty and exploitation is a no-brainer it won't be enough
- you'll be morally required to extend to them all the legal protections
of personhood that being 'ensoled' guarantees. Not only would
that mean freedom from their use as subjects of medical research
or even meat but also their role as own-able property. You'll
certainly have to reconsider your belief paradigm that all human
beings are persons and given that you'll have to take on Peter
Singers argument that the lives of healthy animals ought to be
weighed equally with human beings begins to make sense.
Or, of course you could stop the rot and tell Richard Webster
and his animal welfare buddies that ensuring the proper, ethical
treatment of animals is not the same thing as conferring souls
on them. Animals are not little persons. Some of them have intellectual
abilities that are shadows of our own but that does not give them
equal rights with humans. They're incapable of conveying abstractions
like "third-person" messages, they can't store knowledge
or species history and so lack a culture.
Stressing the similarity between humans and non-human animals
is dangerous. Next time Webster and his friends are ruminating
on the souls of their dogs they would do well to realize they're
part of a much bigger debate that if people like Singer have their
way, will change for ever the divide between being and non-human.
Personally I think the idea of a dog with a soul is plain silly.
For one thing dogs don't have a sense of humour. But then show
me a dog that can tell a good blonde joke and I might change my
mind.
Have your say on this column:
Barb Sumner Burstyn.
© Barbara Sumner Burstyn
August 2002.
P.O.V. with
Barbara Sumner Burstyn @
http://www.spectator.co.nz/POV
and now @ http://www.mensnewsdaily.com
|
