Rating: 
Summary: Going down a well traveled path.
Review: Prof. Francione's new book, like his others, is merely a revisiting of old theories and known practices. There is no question that humans have different standards when relating to animals, this is a sad and highly unfortunate reality, but we have different standards when treating other humans. There needs to be a complete attitudinal and systematic change to society and its beliefs. There is certainly a desperate need for animal rights theory, but theory must stimulate new approaches and ideas. The animal rights movement has leaders like Peter Singer that stir debate and, in turn, leads its activates to gather and make changes. The movement also has other legal writers that tell us how to use the human biased legal system to include animals like attorney, Steve Wise. Despite Prof. Francione's dislike of animal welfare, rights and welfare are interchangeable - rights are but a form of welfare all dependent on the grace of society and government. Change for humans is hard, slow and often not recognized within a single humans lifespan. Prof. Francione's approach to animal rights is all or nothing - now. This is nice, but with species dying and suffering everyday at the hands of man within a human based system we can't afford to theorize - we must act.I am certainly not a PeTA supporter. They, like Francione, are extremely inconsistant in beliefs and use rhetoric to gain attention. Neither advance anything but self gratification.
Rating: 
Summary: A powerful wake-up call for an animal-expoiting culture
Review: Professor Francione's philosophy has never been more concisely or urgently articulated than in this book. Paring the discussion of our treatment of animals down to basic elements and building his arguments with rigorous logic, Francione makes an overwhelming case that may even convince the casual reader to adopt a change in lifestyle. What makes this book so powerful is that rather than convince us that we should believe what he believes about justice and/or morality in human/animal relations, Francione shows that we already DO belive it - it's just that most of us are too confused or too lazy to act on such beliefs. The criticism(s?) of his "all or nothing" stance miss the point - Francione's abolitionist stance provokes all readers to examine the very foundation of their own opinions, and assists animal activists in making coherent arguments for the cause. A cup of very strong, if occasionally bitter, coffee that should wake up every American.
Rating:
Summary: Animal rights- back to basics
Review: The animal rights "movement" has become somewhat convoluted and to someone trying to familiarize themselves with animal rights theory for the first time, or to someone struggling to stay true to a pure animal rights approach, the mixed messages put out by self-proclaimed animal advocates can be very confusing. While many of today's animal "activists" are chosing to focus on taking small, incremental steps under a welfarist approach, Francione maintains that the insitutionalized use of animals as means to human ends is always anti-thetical to a true animal rights position, no matter how "well" or "humanely" exploited animals are treated. Francione's holistic approach makes animal rights theory accessible to everyone.
Rating:
Summary: Animal rights- back to basics
Review: The animal rights "movement" has become somewhat convoluted and to someone trying to familiarize themselves with animal rights theory for the first time, or to someone struggling to stay true to a pure animal rights approach, the mixed messages put out by self-proclaimed animal advocates can be very confusing. While many of today's animal "activists" are chosing to focus on taking small, incremental steps under a welfarist approach, Francione maintains that the insitutionalized use of animals as means to human ends is always anti-thetical to a true animal rights position, no matter how "well" or "humanely" exploited animals are treated. Francione's holistic approach makes animal rights theory accessible to everyone.
Rating:
Summary: The most succinct and thorough animal rights book
Review: The three most well known authors of 'animal rights' books are Tom Regan, Peter Singer and Gary Francione.
Tom Regan's writing is good but I find it has inconsistencies, for example, he attributes non-human animals with inherent value, yet he asserts without justification that killing a human causes more harm to a human than killing a dog causes harm to a dog. Also, he draws the moral line between mammals and the rest of sentient life. Surely sentience, the ability to be the subject of experiences (both painful and pleasurable experiences), is the only factor that has an impact on the moral matter of our treatment of animals. A non-human animal may never experience the pleasure of playing a musical instrument or writing a piece of music, the satisfaction of completing a challenging essay or the stimulation of a game of chess - but neither will most humans. Whatsmore, I will never be able to experience the euphoria of smelling a multitude of scents at the park, the amazing anticipation of going for a run that my dog experiences and the joy of fetching a ball. These experiences are all subjective - to a dog (as an example of a non-human animal) going for a walk is as exciting as composing a piece of music and playing tug of war over a rubber toy is as fun as human competitive sport. We can't say that because the things animals derive pleasure from are not typically what we derive pleasure from that their experiences don't matter as much as ours. Going for an explore in the park amongst the myriad of sights, sounds and smells is to a dog what life is all about.
Of Peter Singer I say this, his writing is commonly confused as animal rights writing - he does talk about AR, but in no way does he support it. Peter Singer does not think using an animal for human ends (e.g., killing an animal to eat it, use in experiments or otherwise utilize) is wrong. He believes non-human animals (perhaps with the exclusion of the great apes - his reasoning: they are too alike to normal humans) are property for 'normal' humans to utilize as long as 'suffering' is minimalised. Singer draws an arbitrary line to protect 'normal' humans like himself from exploitation whilst justifying the exploitation of those who fall below the arbitrary line.
Francione on the other hand, argues that sentience is the only thing that matters in the determination of whether a being has the basic right to freedom from expoitation. He argues his case for animal rights clearly, thoroughly and succinctly without the major inconsistencies that appear in Singers and Regans work. At the end of the book he has provided commonly occuring questions and his respective answers. I found his answers intelligent, original and highly persuasive.
Francione's book is the bible (without the Judeo-Christian dogma) of the true Animal Rights movement. It is a must buy. Regan's work is still important and worth looking at because we must still recognise the importance of his pioneering efforts in animal ethics. Singers work should only be borrowed from the library - to be able to effectively deal with utilitarian arguments when they are presented.
Note: I have a sneaking suspicion that Singer or one of his clones (PETA??) was responsible for the reviews: "Francione not realistic and nor constructive" and "Going down a well travelled path". Singer must be very defensive now that his 'ivory'(the death of the elephants was relatively painless he assures you) tower that he built from sales of 'Animal Liberation' is starting to crumble. The big Animal Welfare organisations also have a lot to lose from Francione's criticism - they get a lot of revenue... from people who think their money is going to be put to good use.
Rating: 
Summary: an excellent introduction
Review: This book is an excellent resource for factual information regarding the abuse and exploitation of animals in our society. It is also an excellent introduction to the laws that regulate such exploitation. Basically, US law is that if ANY abuse -- ANY infliction of pain and suffering, ANY torture, death for ANY reason, no matter how horrendous -- is either "routine" (that is, commonly done; the industry standard) or overseen by someone with a degree in science (i.e., some vivisector) then the law permits it. Recently, laws have been proposed to make those who try to protect animals from such abuse labelled "terrorists": the real terrorists are the goverment-, med- & vet-school, and university-sponsored abusers themselves, of course. Readers will learn a lot from this book. They should, however, take the more "philosophical" aspects of the book with a grain of salt. Francione is provocative, but his claims about what kind of advocacy "real" animal rights advocates can engage in, what tactics will (if any) really succeed in the long run, and his criticisms of some philosophers are often not as carefully defended as they should be. Nevertheless, for the factual information alone, this book really is an excellent introduction to the issues. Very highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: an excellent introduction
Review: This book is an excellent resource for factual information regarding the abuse and exploitation of animals in our society. It is also an excellent introduction to the laws that regulate such exploitation. Basically, US law is that if ANY abuse -- ANY infliction of pain and suffering, ANY torture, death for ANY reason, no matter how horrendous -- is either "routine" (that is, commonly done; the industry standard) or overseen by someone with a degree in science (i.e., some vivisector) then the law permits it. Recently, laws have been proposed to make those who try to protect animals from such abuse labelled "terrorists": the real terrorists are the goverment-, med- & vet-school, and university-sponsored abusers themselves, of course. Readers will learn a lot from this book. They should, however, take the more "philosophical" aspects of the book with a grain of salt. Francione is provocative, but his claims about what kind of advocacy "real" animal rights advocates can engage in, what tactics will (if any) really succeed in the long run, and his criticisms of some philosophers are often not as carefully defended as they should be. Nevertheless, for the factual information alone, this book really is an excellent introduction to the issues. Very highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: It caused me to become vegan (and I am grateful for it)
Review: This is an amazing book. Eloquently written, well-thought out arguments, facts to back up their arguements. If everyone read this book, I don't see how our world would be the same. We would be unable to continue our misuse of animals without, at the vary least, a guilty conscience of knowing what we are doing is wrong. Highly recommend to anyone whether or not you already believe in animal rights.
Rating:
Summary: It caused me to become vegan (and I am grateful for it)
Review: This is an amazing book. Eloquently written, well-thought out arguments, facts to back up their arguements. If everyone read this book, I don't see how our world would be the same. We would be unable to continue our misuse of animals without, at the vary least, a guilty conscience of knowing what we are doing is wrong. Highly recommend to anyone whether or not you already believe in animal rights.
|
