The legally legitimised relationship to animals mirrors the history of phil
osophy. The relationship between animals and people in the Middle Ages and
in the early Modern Age and the then corresponding jurisdiction allows grea
t insights in this respect. Animals were then considered equal to people. A
s a consequence, it was possible in the Middle Ages and in the early Modern
Age that legal proceedings against animals were undertaken, animals could
even be sentenced to death. Enlightenment philosophy changed this by giving
legal status exclusively to humans. In modernity animals are not considere
d to be people. Animals do not act voluntarily and do not have conscious kn
owledge of possible reactions to their own actions. Because of that it is n
ot possible to hold them responsible for their actions. The philosophically
based premises for guilt are not given and therefore legal proceedings aga
inst animals are no longer justified.
The law in respect to animals underwent complete changes as a consequence o
f philosophical innovation. Legally, animals are now objects and fall under
the law of property. The depersonalisation of animals and accordingly the
withdrawal of rights that are now exclusively given to people turns animals
into basic commodities. The current efforts in philosophy to restore the r
espect for animals are answered either with the concept of interest or agai
n with a concept that is linked to personality. Both ways turn out to be in
adequate when it comes to integrating animals into ethics. Therefore we sug
gest an ethics that is open to empathy and the "view of the other". The sup
ported ethics is orientated to the phenomenal philosophy of Emmanuel Levina
s and in contrast to conventional types of ethics it represents a higher de
gree of coherence as the phenomenal ethics is able to integrate phenomena o
f life as much as possible. Phenomenal ethics gives reasons for a title of
life for higher animals and the prohibition of animal testing. The banning
of animal testing should be absolute, no exceptions are justified.