動物權的概念已經廣泛地被認可為善待動物的一個道德理論。Tom Regan所主張的動物權立場被認為是動物權倡導者中最強的一派，但也遭受到極大的批判。所以，我們提出兩個問題：「動物有權利嗎？」及「Regan動物權的權力基礎是什麼？」透過評論Regan的動物權，我們認為那些批判與爭辯的原因出於Regan對權利概念的誤用。首先，我們對權利的概念及權利與責任的相關性進行探討，接下來，我們釐清誰可以擁有權利。我們進一步提供一個更可行的權利立場來解釋Regan的動物權。最後，我們回答前述兩個問題：(1) 動物具有部分道德權利；(2) 特別權利可做為Regan動物權之更好的權利基礎。

The concept of animal rights has received significant acceptance as a moral theory for ethical treatment of animals. Tom Regan’s animal rights view is considered as the strongest position among animal rightists, but encountered
enormous critiques. Therefore, we pose two questions: “do animals have right?” and “what is the ground of Regan’s animal rights view?”. Through the commentary of Regan’s animal rights view, we argue those critiques and debates are originated from the misuse of the concept of rights. We first investigate the concept of rights and the correlativity between right and duty, then, examine who can possess rights. Further, we offer a more plausible right position to interpret Regan’s animal rights view. In conclusion, we answer two questions: (1) animals have certain moral rights, and (2) the more plausible ground of Regan’s animal rights is special rights.