Aristotle on Animal Experimentation
Aristotle would indeed not approve of experiments performed on animals. He
seems to put much emphasis throughout his writings on the similarity of the animal and
humans. He also puts much emphasis on the fact that animals and plants are very
different. The only thing animals lack, according to Aristotle, that differentiate them from
humans is a mind. He says that nutrition is shared by all natural living organisms but
animals have perception in addition, and among natural organisms humans alone have
mind. The mind is exclusively a human property. However, Aristotle?s many other
examples that make animals human-like indicate that he would not be one for animal
experimentation.
When he explains the qualities of plants, animals. and humans, he declares that any
creature with reason will also have perception; any creature with perception will also have
the ability to take on nutrition and to reproduce; but the converse does not hold. Thus,
plants show up with only the nutritive soul, animals have both perceptual and nutritive
faculties, and humans have all three. This means animals are very close to humans, only
lacking one step which is reason. Also, to distinguish animals from plants, Aristotle
stresses that perception is the capacity of the soul which distinguishes animals from plants
and that having a perceptive ability is decisive of being an animal. Animals must have
perception if they are to live. He gives the example of a dog knowing his master, not only
as any man, but ?his master–the man who on other occasions has fed, trained, punished,
and praised him(Jones, 242).? Though he does also show some small differences in the
perception of animals and humans, Aristotle does focus much of his attention on the
similarities that one must recognize. Clearly, therefore, Aristotle would not advocate
animal experimentation.