Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

Are zoos ethical in the modern age? Show more Show less

Zoos can be a fun trip for any age, young or old. It may be the only chance most people will be able to see various exotic animals from around the world. Yet, they have also been known to be unethical or dangerous for both the animals and people. What are the sides to the zoo debate? Are zoos truly bad?

No, zoos are good Show more Show less

Zoos are simply a fun day out, and are also ways to support vulnerable animals.
< Previous (2 of 2 Positions)

Zoo animals have a longer life expectancy

Captive animals tend to live longer than their wild counterparts.
< Previous (2 of 5 Arguments) Next >
animals ethics zoo

Context

The Argument

Scientists have proved that most wild animals have a longer life expectancy when kept in zoos.[1] Being in a safe environment with access to professional care ensures an animal will live into old age. While in zoos, animals also mature at a slower rate, causing them to live longer. This proves zoos are beneficial and helpful to animal survival. For example, female lions live over 10 years longer in captivity.

Counter arguments

Some animals live longer in the wild than in zoos. For example, elephants live over twice as long when free.[2] Lack of exercise is the biggest cause of death among elephants in zoos. Elephants travel long distances in the wild; when being held in captivity, they cannot get the proper exercise they need.

Framing

Premises

[P1] Most animals live longer in captivity. [P2] Zoos increase the lifespans of animals.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Some animals, like elephants, live longer in the wild.

Proponents

Further Reading

References

  1. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep36361
  2. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/12/wild-elephants-live-longer-than-their-zoo-counterparts/

Explore related arguments

This page was last edited on Thursday, 19 Mar 2020 at 16:29 UTC