The Theory Of Animal Rights Under The Horizon Of Honneth Recognition Theory

The animal rights as the topic of environmental ethics has been extensively discussed in recent decades. Explore the animal rights issues is essentially the first step of the moral thinking of all non-anthropocentrism. To achieve the transition from human rights to the natural rights, the thinking of animal rights is a valid entry point. Animal rights theory can be divided into ability’, contract’, Reconstruction of rights. Singer utilitarian tradition of animal liberation theory, Tom Reagan deontological tradition of animal rights theory, G·L·Francione and Mary Warren belong to ability’, they hold that the foundation of right should be found in the main internal; rough contract’ and the Rawls-fine hold that the rights comes from the social contract between people and from the habits of the Community; rights deconstruction faction advocated the concept of "rights" is a category of legal relationship of a social or moral relations, it can not be applied in animals, the animals do not have the"personality", animals lack the necessary conditions as rights-holders, so rights is limited to "human rights". This paper focuses on discussion that when"capacity doctrine"seeks the basis for animal rights in the main house, regardless of the criterion of Singer’s ability to feel joy or Reagan’s"subject of life" criterion, it cannot solve the standard random problem. Han Lixin’s ideas is to jump off the logic of "relations", to find the basis of the right from, inside the human nature. Departure from human nature, the focus of animal rights changes from the animal according to what has the right to the rights of man itself, why should we recognize animal. The attempt of this paper is the introduction of Honneth, recognition theory, to re-elaborate the basis for animal rights.Inspired by Hegel’s concept of "struggle for recognition" proposed Jena period, in the new theoretical context after Hegel, Honneth combines with the tradition of Kant and Aristotle, and connects Universal code of ethics with the normative content of social theory.He focuses on Hegel’s argumentation system for system reconfiguration, and distinguishes three forms of intersubjective recognition:love, legal rights and solidarity. Mead social psychology of Hegel’s concept of naturalistic conversion into Hegel’s theory of inter subjectivity conversion became a metaphysical theory of language. Honneth in a phenomenological approach typology described by the three modes of recognition, these three models correspond to the love, law, rights and solidarity, the main gain confidence in the three recognized forms of self-esteem, weight. As corresponding to the recognition of the relationship between negative equivalent, that is, contempt, divided into rape, deprivation of rights and an insult to the three forms, three kinds of contempt in the form of injury to a person’s self-confidence, self-esteem and self-respect. Contempt for the moral motivation to become a social conflict, the moral logic of social conflict:contempt-conflict-Recognition in the struggle. By the empirical and normative combining theoretical approach, Honneth elaborated for the recognition of the struggle theory to reveal the moral logic of social conflict. Honneth’s ultimate desire is to the good life of virtue, he constructed a recognized based on the theory of ethics, and recognition of experience and personal self-linked, personal self-realization of the main structure from the personal identity.Honneth recognize the inspiring thought of the theory are:(1) the relationship between intersubjectivity thinking man and animals, a new perspective. This perspective is not the animal as "objects" of object, but as the main body of some contacts with people.(2) recognize the form of the general form of the specification, but these relationships are not out of history is given, but only through social struggle has been established and launched the. (3) the existence of conflict between man and animal interests, potentially the moral position of the person’s requirements. (4) the right derives from the recognition of intersubjectivity, as the struggle continues to expand.From the recognition of the dimension to rethink the theory of animal rights, you first need to clearly define:(1) the meaning of the right itself, simply, the right to the protection of the interests; (2) lack of moral capacity does not affect the owners of moral rights; (3) between humans and animals there is some kind of interaction.The animals have their own interests is one we can accept the fact that animal interests and the interests of the existence of some kind of conflict is an acceptable fact. From these two facts, we can see people and animals there are at least the original interaction, namely the struggle of interests. If people like the animals do not have the moral capacity, and that this interaction can not explain what the problem, because we often observed in animals this primitive interaction exists. However, the crux of the problem is moral. Although people are not developed in the separate and the animals get along moral values, however, once people sure do have the moral capacity, while animals in the animal world without morality and moral world of human confrontation situation, and we have no compelling reason to animals because animals lack the moral capacity would not be its ethical considerations, that people and animals of this original interactive forced us to take a moral stance on animal-this self-interest of individuals or equal treatment, or unequal treatment. Equal treatment means that our moral reason to recognize the rationality of their right to benefits, and unequal treatment means that we be denied the enjoyment of the interests of rationality. When We recognize that animals have the rationality of their interests, animals have some kind of recognized rights; when we deny their right to the interests of rationality, animals do not enjoy the rights recognized in.Admit is not a passive recognition of the interest demands of animals, nor is it a negative response from people outside the interests of the requirements. Although people are "forced" to face the conflict of interest of the people and animals and take a moral stance, but has been able to take this position, intrinsic motivation, or moral capacity as a moral subject. This reaction is the moral initiative. On the other hand, admit that it is not just moral subjects conscience accidental issued by the kindness, the recognition of animal rights is rooted in the animals as a stakeholder and as a stakeholder and moral subjects coupled between interactive.The Recognition dimension of animal rights discussed in detail in response to the problem of the beginning of article. To overcome the characteristics of the animal rights in some capacity has a metaphysical basis, the rights you need as a moral subject and the interaction of the animals as stakeholders associated regulations.