>and the scientists just recapture it by force. They actively oppose the animal's attempts to liberate itself, again and again.
I guess you subscribe to deontological ethics? I wonder how would you reconcile it with the following questions.
What's your stance on police actively opposing the [offending] human's attempts to liberate itself?
What's your stance on doctors actively opposing the [considered mentally ill] attempts to liberate itself?
Obviously humans are highly intelligent and inventive creatures. Prison torture, rape and humiliation may not be on the same level of cruelty as laboratory experiments but mental institutions procedures are definitely comparable.
That's a false equivalence surely. Animals don't have a stake in the law- and policy-making process, whereas humans do - including all those potentially subject to those actions in the future.
In essence, humans have agreed to do these things to themselves. Animals do not have that opportunity.
Glibly, subgroups of humans called "the government" institutionalize procedures for the treatment of other humans. Without going into which groups of people are represented by these governments, which is a very important discussion in its own right, the species has its own voice. That's not the case with octopuses or lab rats or what have you.
I guess you subscribe to deontological ethics? I wonder how would you reconcile it with the following questions.
What's your stance on police actively opposing the [offending] human's attempts to liberate itself?
What's your stance on doctors actively opposing the [considered mentally ill] attempts to liberate itself?
Obviously humans are highly intelligent and inventive creatures. Prison torture, rape and humiliation may not be on the same level of cruelty as laboratory experiments but mental institutions procedures are definitely comparable.