Charlie is a four-year-old chimpanzee. He communicates using American Sign Language, solves simple puzzles, recognizes familiar people, and obeys various instructions. Herb is a fifteen-year-old human being (homo sapiens) with a severe mental impairment. He will never be able to use or understand human language. He will never be able to recognize people, solve even simple puzzles, or obey instructions. Engaging Peter Singer’s arguments, defend a position regarding the morally permissible treatment of Charlie and Herb. For example, is it permissible for medical researchers to perform painful experiments on Charlie for the purpose of saving human lives? Is it permissible to perform painful experiments on Herb for that purpose? Is it permissible to kill Charlie and consume his flesh for its taste (when doing so isn’t necessary for one’s own health)? Is it permissible to kill Herb for that reason? Defend your position against objections.
Sample Solution