Whenever I gaze into the eyes of a feral cat, I wonder one question: “Is the cat also gazing at me?” The pale eyes, although aimless and ignorant as they appear, somehow convince me that I am also gazed. People say that the moment you find yourself being gazed, something will change. It is true: in this state you find yourself not the only subject, and you cannot help thinking what the other subject is thinking. For me, the change was that when I later saw a parrot in the cage, I wondered: “how does it feel?” – that’s where my interest in animal protection stemmed.
I found animal protection a fascinating topic when my father, who sees himself as a steadfast advocate of animal rights, boycotting leather products and preaching thinking from animal’s perspectives, did not allow me to put a Tiger Barb in his aquarium tank. “The bottle is big enough for it,” defended my father, scooping it from the tank and putting it back to a half-liter-sized bottle. Observing that poor little creature and the animal right advocate nearby, one question crosses my mind: “Isn’t my father same as those claiming sharks won’t suffer when their fins are cut off, or those insisting elephants can survive when their tusks are sawn off?”
My father’s word dawned on me that although long been considered as a crucial issue for modern civilization, repeatedly indoctrinated in textbooks and advertisement, animal protection in this sense can look hypocritical and sanctimonious. Personal preference and double standard plays a big part. As noticing this, I felt nothing but guilt and responsibility. Every time I see the eyes of feral cats, I am tormented, and since then I eagerly want to inform people that they are under gaze by animals.
127 our experts are availableright now
I acted. I joined a club that takes care of the feral cats, bringing them to neutering and vaccination; I experienced vegetarianism for months; as the director of a chamber orchestra, I hosted concerts, whose proceeds went to an animal protection foundation. Through these activities I recognize that there are many genuine animal lovers as well as hypocritical ones, which reminds me of an important fact I used to overlook: though we might be self-deceiving in some respects, our ultimate motivations, namely our empathy and our sense of guilt when being stared, are definitely genuine.
This fact provides me confidence and hope towards ourselves. However, I know that only having empathy is pointless and intellectual foundation is necessary. I therefore turn to great minds. On what grounds do we define our superiority to animals, which is actually implausible? Do we really have the obligation to protect those beings? For me, these questions, concerning the fundamental legitimacy of animal protection, are more important than animal protection. I owe a lot intellectually to great minds, from whom I deepen my understanding of human hypocrisy and legitimacy of human actions: from Kant I realize that animal protection probably prevents nothing but the right in terms of our fear of guilt rather than the animal’s right; David DeGariza presents an alternative approach that personhood, which directly leads to moral right, is not monopolized by human, which provides justification for animals’ moral status, and thus legitimacy of animal protection.
Certainly, my journey does not stop here. I return to my activities, with stronger confidence. Now I am taking philosophy and biology in my high school, which are both essential for this topic, one providing a metaphysical motivation while the other a practical capability. In my next four years in college, I really want to keep exploring animal protection and rights from not only philosophy and biology, but also other subjects. Animal protection will be a life-long pursuit of me, and I will go on, with passion and confidence, against all odds, as long as that I am gazed by those beings.
