And anyone with a cat or dog can tell you that their pets has emotions, they can't match humans for facial expressions but you can still see it.
There's no doubt that animals have emotions - at least to some extent. The question, however, lies in the extent of these emotions, or if the extent even matters.
This example does not prove anything about morality.
Hmm.. yeah I guess so. What I wanted to say is that there is no right or no wrong, there is everyone's subjective attitude towards animals and their life. Hence they value their lives differently, but will apply their own morailty on the acts of everyone concerning an animal.
I think human life should be valued over an animals. We're the dominant species.
Why must every time I write a one page long text the armorgames server fails XD
Anyways, basically what I said is we should respect animals, plus think what will happen if the tables are turned. Also think what will happen if animals are not important to us. Would you still respect them?
I think human life should be valued over an animals. We're the dominant species.
It's statements like these that make me wonder if it's not the other way around. I mean, let's face it, humans are jerks. I'm not saying every human is, but the human race in general is a race of selfish ******** and arrogant jerks. Sure, humans might be more intelligent than other species, and have become the dominant race, but I bet animals would never consider another species less worthy the way we do, even if they were capable of such reasoning.
Besides, humans have caused a lot of harm to the environment, especially compared to other animals, and you can wonder if maybe the nature wouldn't be better of without us.
Sorry if I sound like a negative person, I just don't like people who go "HUMANS RULE, ANIMALS DROOL!" (even if many animals, including my family's old cat, do so) and use that as their only argument.
What I wanted to say is that there is no right or no wrong, there is everyone's subjective attitude towards animals and their life. Hence they value their lives differently, but will apply their own morailty on the acts of everyone concerning an animal.
I completely agree with you here the situation is entirely a subjective matter.
I think human life should be valued over an animals. We're the dominant species.
This too is entirely subjective. Put us in a situation against a large predator and we stop being so dominant.
Put us in a situation against a large predator and we stop being so dominant.
But, if the predators were dominant, then why are we still here? It's not like everyone walks around with a shotgun in case they get ambushed by a lion. We're superior because we think, reason, and can intentionally do things with purpose. It's not like lions can gang up and decide to destroy the human race, even if they COULD they wouldn't because they wouldn't know how. People make inferences of their own will, animals do not make inferences unless confronted with an immediate need to do so.
But, if the predators were dominant, then why are we still here?
What he meant wasn't that the predators ruled the earth, what he meant was that who's dominant can depend on the situation. And, I should add, the fact that we are dominant may very well depend on how we've exploited the nature, and expanded with little to no concern for the environment, both of which would make us the "bad guys" of the Earth, which in turn would, in my opinion, diminish the worth of our lives.
We're superior because we think, reason, and can intentionally do things with purpose.
Again, that's our opinion. Perhaps in the big picture, beings who helped nature would be the ones that are the superior ones. By that logic, even worms might be more superior to humans. Your opinion of what's "superior" isn't very impartial.
It's not like lions can gang up and decide to destroy the human race, even if they COULD they wouldn't because they wouldn't know how.
Of course not. Hunting species to extinction and killing for the sake of killing isn't something lions do. It's something humans do.
PS: Just to make this clear, I don't hate people or anything. I'm not a negative person. I just don't think it's right to say humans have more right to live than other animals. I agree with that us humans should value the lives of our fellow humans over the lives of animals, but I really don't think it makes sense to say that humans deserve to live any more than animals.
This thread is not about if humans are dominant over other animals, per se, but if we should hold the same regard as we hold our fellow man.
They are related, and the discussion is interesting, but could we talk a little bit more about how high we should the value of the death of an animal.
Some people have said that we were not supposed to value them as highly, as we are the dominant race and therefore have the right not to (a bit of a Nazi warning there, TBH). That's why the discussions about dominance were, in fact, quite relevant.
And you made a post to tell us to go on-topic, but you did not add anything to the discussion at all. I'd almost call you a hypocrit, if it wasn't for the fact that I just made this post in which I pretty much just correct you.
And you made a post to tell us to go on-topic, but you did not add anything to the discussion at all. I'd almost call you a hypocrit, if it wasn't for the fact that I just made this post in which I pretty much just correct you.
I like to view the discussion more than actually go into it. I would not say I am a hypocrite since I want to see you guys talk about it. I have no real stance on whether we should hold them as high to us or lower, that's why I didn't choose a side in my OP.
Hence they value their lives differently, but will apply their own morailty on the acts of everyone concerning an animal.
This only shows that many people must be wrong - not that ALL are wrong. And my example - a utilitarian example bypasses these problems of subjectivity.
animals would never consider another species less worthy the way we do, even if they were capable of such reasoning.
I'd think that it's because of our superior reasoning that we think this way.
