242 replies to this topic

[Toan]

Why do humans prefer themselves?

We will kill and rape Mother Nature and her creations in an instant, but when it comes to each other, we are punished quite severely. Think about it - I could go outside run over a squirrel while driving somewhere and nobody cares enough to DO something about it, but if I went outside and killed my drug-dealing neighbor, suddenly I'm facing serious criminal charges and, if found guilty by a jury of peers, prison time. Apparently trash like my neighbor is contributing to society more than the squirrel is, but it certainly can't be by much.

Now, if I swerved to avoid the squirrel and instead hit an oncoming car and killed the driver, people read the article in the paper and think "He should've just hit the squirrel." Why? There's got to be less squirrels than the 6.5 billion people on Earth, yet humans, even scum, are worth more in collective human mind than a squirrel. "That driver had a family he/she's left behind now!" Presumably so did the squirrel. We make such a big deal out of the death of another human, yet a mashed squirrel in the road is simply an eyesore and something you don't want to get on your tires.

Animals kill each other to stay eat, protect themselves, and stay alive. Essentially we do the same thing. We're animals too - animals with ego, who think just because our brains comprehend more than anything else on Earth, we are above it and better than it as well. Is it religion that tells us we are better - religion that hasn't been proved in the least? Another manifestation of humanity to justifiy our heresy against Earth.

Assume that a God created Earth and put man upon it. Is destroying his other creations (other than man, or even including man) really a great way to say "Hey, Diety, thanks bro!" The word 'hypocricy' comes to mind when countless religions pray and give thanks to God, then return to work to destroy the big man's (or woman's... *shrug*) creations.

I'm not saying I don't care if someone dies, far from it. But I do think that if something is killed, it should at least get proper and equal respect in death, human or not.

[spunky-monkey]

I see what you mean...you value all life regardless if it happens to be human or animal life. Though one could go further and say trees and plants are living things, therefore equal as well. The reason why human life is considered more valuable is because society says so. Now I'm not really what you would call an "animal lover" its just the problem I find is that most animals don't seem to have any 'soul', you look into say for example a dogs eyes and you can see it only cares about where its next meal is coming from. Nature is a bitch as far as that is concerned.
Though whales and dolphins seem to be exceptions, in that when you stare at them, they stare back at you. It's all rather unnerving to be honest, dolphins are quite willing to protect people from sharks at the expense of their own lives...that's so unnatural...though Toan you'll be pleased to learn that some tribes see them as equals and bury people and dolphins together in graves.

[MikePetersSucks]

The Bible said that Man had dominion over all of God's other creatures.

The Bible also says that Man should not kill his brothers and fellows.

Most of the human race follow the Bible.

Those that don't have similar values in their ethics, morals, or religion.

[Toan]

I see what you mean...you value all life regardless if it happens to be human or animal life. Though one could go further and say trees and plants are living things, therefore equal as well. The reason why human life is considered more valuable is because society says so. Now I'm not really what you would call an "animal lover" its just the problem I find is that most animals don't seem to have any 'soul', you look into say for example a dogs eyes and you can see it only cares about where its next meal is coming from. Nature is a bitch as far as that is concerned.
Though whales and dolphins seem to be exceptions, in that when you stare at them, they stare back at you. It's all rather unnerving to be honest, dolphins are quite willing to protect people from sharks at the expense of their own lives...that's so unnatural...though Toan you'll be pleased to learn that some tribes see them as equals and bury people and dolphins together in graves.

Well... I agree with you for the most part, but a dog can express emotion and soul further than you described, I believe. It is upset or resentful of you if you yell or hit it, and if you hurt it, it will whimper, or it will strike back. But yes, I think life should be valued the same.

The Bible said that Man had dominion over all of God's other creatures.

The Bible also says that Man should not kill his brothers and fellows.

Most of the human race follow the Bible.

Those that don't have similar values in their ethics, morals, or religion.

The Bible was written by man, so of course they would say that, but why do they hold themselves in higher regard? Because their God supposedly said so? Speaking of which, the Bible says killing brothers isn't okay, so presumably everything else is, right?

[Dryth]

Humans aren't necessarily better than everything (or anything) else.

However, being distinct from everything else, of course we're going to apply bias. We're all somewhat governed by utilitarian instincts, trained to view ourselves as naturally more important than those around us. As a consequence we'll also assign greater importance to those that are most similar to ourselves. Unless I'm a solipsist it's natural for me to project my own internal notions of consciousness, personality, and soul onto those around me. Other factors also come into play: Distance, culture, etc. While not a black and white issue, I'm going to assign various creatures different rankings against these criteria.

It's not unique to animals, either: I'd care more about a drunken lowlife neighbour than a saint living halfway across the world because I can relate more easily to that neighbour. And so in a similar fashion if I accidentally run over a squirrel I'm not going to be so heartbroken either. I didn't know that squirrel, and have a hard time relating to it. If a cow gets killed a thousand miles away, my priority in filling my stomach outweighs my guilt over its death.

Ultimately, one of the reasons I can shrug off my burden in such matters is because I know just as well that there isn't going to be a funeral procession for that squirrel, or a wake for that cow by their own species: The lack of ceremony amongst animals isn't so much a reflection of our disdain for them as our worship of the human race for us being a part of it.

[Fyxe]

I'd just like to say 'no' to the topic title. In fact, I think humans as a whole are subordinate to the rest of the species on the planet. Why? Because, despite our 'intelligence', we are selfish, cruel and destructive.

I would rather a human die than an animal. Very bluntly. Animals are weak, animals do not deserve to suffer. They do nothing to hurt people, they cannot be selfish; they're just being themselves. Humans recognise that they're selfish yet continue to be. Humans experience more of the world than an animal does, so the death of one human in my eyes isn't as unfair as the death of an animal.

Now I'm not really what you would call an "animal lover" its just the problem I find is that most animals don't seem to have any 'soul', you look into say for example a dogs eyes and you can see it only cares about where its next meal is coming from. Nature is a bitch as far as that is concerned.

What do you call a 'soul'? That's just rubbish. If that's really what you see when you look into a dog's eyes, you clearly don't know the dog. You should look into the eyes of some jerk down a local pup; you can clearly see all he cares about is where he can get his next lay from.

The differences between humans and animals are smaller the more carefully you look. Humans are affected by instinct, hormones and chemicals in the brain just as much as other animals, the difference is that we're generally more complex (although this could be defined as 'stupid'). That's all.

[Kwicky Koala]

I assume it's all about how much we can relate to the animal that saves it. The more human it looks the more reluctant people will be to kill it. But yes, the animal's life means as much to the animal it as your life means to you. If you want people to stop favouring human life you should probably stop eating animals, because you're never going to respect something you eat.

[Showsni]

I'd never kill an animal intentionally. But humans are more important than them, according to Christianity. We should still care for and protect the rest of God's creation, though.

[Fyxe]

Its perfectly possible to respect what you eat, to be fair. Some African tribes, for example, after chasing down their prey, praise it's strength and bravery with a ritual after killing it.

Of course, the Western world as a whole has absolutely no respect for animals we eat. The entire concept of a slaughterhouse just makes me feel ill.

[Selena]

Personally, I'd rather beat up a human than an animal. More or less for the same reasons Fyxe's stated. The animal's done nothing to you, and if it's something like a dog or a similar pet the main goal in their mind is to make you happy, no matter how badly you treat it. With wild animals, they pretty much just mind their own business.

I'm squeemish about hunting. Never thought a rifle vs. a deer was an even match up. I was secretly rooting for the bear on tv who mauled a couple hunters. Not so nice when you're hunted back, eh? But with hunting, I can dismiss it if you actually eat the deer after you kill it. That's what hunting was supposed to be. Hunt for food, not for sport.

But why's eating an animal wrong? They do it to. They kind of have to. Ya know... to live. Not liking the thought of eating an animal that's been mass produced for slaughter or eating animals if you like greens more is one thing, but I wouldn't label eating an animal in general as 'wrong'. If no animals ate other animals, then the world would be overpopulated and unable to support that many creatures. It keeps the ecosystem and food chain in check.

because you're never going to respect something you eat.

Not... always true? Well, maybe for modern culture it is. But other cultures are humble about it and give thanks to the animal they've had to kill. I think it was an old Inuit tribe who, after they've made a kill, gathered the animal's favorite food together (no matter how long it took to find it) and place it in their mouth before gathering the meat from the kill, as a symbolic 'last meal' of sorts. So yeah. You can respect what you eat. I always try to eat the whole amount of meat I get with a meal, just so there's none that goes to waste and death won't be in vain. Waste not.

Edited by Selena, 19 December 2005 - 03:16 PM.

[Khuffie]

Assume that a God created Earth and put man upon it. Is destroying his other creations (other than man, or even including man) really a great way to say "Hey, Diety, thanks bro!" The word 'hypocricy' comes to mind when countless religions pray and give thanks to God, then return to work to destroy the big man's (or woman's... *shrug*) creations.

Define what you mean by 'destroy'. Do you consider killing animals for food 'destruction'? Accidentally killing squirrels? Or more likely...going out of your way to kill a squirrel?

You'll find many religions count animals and plants as a blessing by God, as they provide a source of food and nutrition for us. Part of the whole praying and thanking God is for those blessings. At the same time, you'll find the same religions condemn mindlessly slaughtering and torturing animals and punish their followers for doing so, and at the same time call for protecting the environment and only taking what you need.

I don't think its religion that tells us we're better than animals, but the fact that we can actually tell ourselves things .

[Alakhriveion]

Most of the human race follow the Bible.

No they don't.


I wouldn't want to kill or eat people because people can think. Wouldn't eat monkeys or dolphins, either. Cows? Cows are pretty dumb. I have no qualms about eating them. Not too complicated.

[Toan]

To be entirely truthful, I know next to nothing about religion than what I gather from TV, friends, and LA, which aren't always exactly truthful... but I will say the last time I went to a Catholic mass, nothing was mentioned about food or animals, just Jesus this and Jesus that, and a workout of sitting, kneeling, standing (practically tae-bo).

I'm not against killing something if you will use it and respect it, like the afformentioned African tribes who praise the animal before cooking it. But when it's just mass slaughtering and not even all of the food is used... why? It's horrible to think that so much food spoils sitting in the grocery store after some animal died to make it.

Khuff, when I thought of destruction, I was thinking more along the lines of totally decimating several acres for another damn Wal-Mart.

Dryth, I agree with your statements of getting to know something makes you care more about it. If the family dog passes away, tears might be shed and a small burial in the backyard might be in store... which is appropriate, I think. But then there are heartless egotisitical pricks that, if they hit a squirrel in the road all they think of is guts on their BMW, and how it just got washed... it sickens me.

[Khuffie]

Khuff, when I thought of destruction, I was thinking more along the lines of totally decimating several acres for another damn Wal-Mart.

See, I come from a desert. Building a Wal-Mart may actually pretty up the environment a bit .

But yes, there's definitely too much waste going on on today's societies. Its hard to blame individuals about food spoiling in the grocery store, but at the same time there's so much food being wasted in more well off societies (if you think America is bad about this...come see Kuwait) that is much needed in other parts of the world. The solution? Who knows, but there definitely needs to be a better balance.

As for heartless bastards, unfortunately, the world will always have those. You really cant run away from them.

Its easy to think that humanity is superior to animals, and easy to forget that without animals, the whole ecosystem would be off balance and humanity wouldn't last. So whatever we're doing, we're mostly doing it to ourselves.

[Kwicky Koala]

But why's eating an animal wrong? They do it to. They kind of have to. Ya know... to live. Not liking the thought of eating an animal that's been mass produced for slaughter or eating animals if you like greens more is one thing, but I wouldn't label eating an animal in general as 'wrong'. If no animals ate other animals, then the world would be overpopulated and unable to support that many creatures. It keeps the ecosystem and food chain in check.
Not... always true? Well, maybe for modern culture it is. But other cultures are humble about it and give thanks to the animal they've had to kill. I think it was an old Inuit tribe who, after they've made a kill, gathered the animal's favorite food together (no matter how long it took to find it) and place it in their mouth before gathering the meat from the kill, as a symbolic 'last meal' of sorts. So yeah. You can respect what you eat. I always try to eat the whole amount of meat I get with a meal, just so there's none that goes to waste and death won't be in vain. Waste not.

It really doesn't matter how much you respect the animal, you've still killed it and eaten it. Do you see what I'm getting at? If we've said that a human is an animal, and we eat animals, why don't we eat humans too? By your logic as long as we give them a last meal we're in the clear. The only reason we don't is something pychological stopping us, which is hardly an excuse.
Our whole civilisation is about betterment, apparantly, and if we stopped eating meat the world would be much better. What was that thing, that it takes 10 times the fuel needed to make a loaf of bread to make a pound of beef? And also, the land we were using for meat could be used for more crops which we could send to poor countries, if that's your thing.
And if a human is an animal, as long as we kill animals it's going to be fine to kill people. If we stopped eating meat people would stop being so indifferent to everyday killing and war would end.

[Selena]

Actually... if every human on the planet just suddenly stopped eating meat to be nice to the fuzzy animals, then the herbivores we generally eat would probably overbreed and overpopulate. Especially since we've relocated or hunted their original predators (mountain lions, wolves, etc.) to the point where it'd even be difficult for them to keep hold of the situation. Predators and meat eaters are sort of vital to the foodchain.

As omnivores, we can survive on just plants or just meat if we want to, but why is it wrong for us to hunt and kill animals to eat their flesh? Bears are omnivores. Should they stop killing deer and live on berries alone? And if not, why are they different? Like I said, I don't like slaughtering or hunting for sport, and it might be in humanity's favor to actually go out an persue their meals for a change (at least for meat). Twas the cardiovascular workout of the Stone Age.

As for why it's the 'killing animals makes it okay to kill other humans' thing... it's just natural instinct not to deliberately kill members of your own species. When you see animals of the same species fighting, it's generally for domination and pack order purposes. Rarely do they actually kill one another. Especially not if they're within the same pack. I don't see why not eating other animals would put an end to war. There's still gonna be the domination factor in humans thanks to pure instinct.


Well, unless you're Hannibal Lecter. He likes the human meat.

[Doopliss]

It's ridiculous to believe animals are worth the same as humans. Simply animals don't have feelings and can't think. From a biological point of view, each species does its best to preserve itself, so it's natural that humans believe to be more valuable than animals. While animals may experience pain, they don't suffer, it's just a reaction to an environmental stymulus to guarantee the individual's survival. Animal's only function is to preserve life on earth. What has atributed animals false feelings are humans themselves.

Even though, I'm completely against animal mistreating, not for animals', but for humans' sake; it's insane to enjoy mistreating animals. I'm also against eating animals because it's better for health to eat vegetables. I believe we must respect animals, anyway, since they're necessary to preserve the ecosystems' balance.

[Kwicky Koala]

Actually... if every human on the planet just suddenly stopped eating meat to be nice to the fuzzy animals, then the herbivores we generally eat would probably overbreed and overpopulate. Especially since we've relocated or hunted their original predators (mountain lions, wolves, etc.) to the point where it'd even be difficult for them to keep hold of the situation. Predators and meat eaters are sort of vital to the foodchain.

That's not really and excuse to keep eating meat. You don't know that will happen.

As omnivores, we can survive on just plants or just meat if we want to, but why is it wrong for us to hunt and kill animals to eat their flesh?

We should really know better. It's not neccesery anymore, and I really do believe that underneath all the myths about where food comes from there is something truly primeval and horrible about that whole idea. You're eating a corpse.

Bears are omnivores. Should they stop killing deer and live on berries alone? And if not, why are they different?

Forcing the bears to eat berries would probably be cruel. And even if they did, they wouldn't understand why they were only eating berries, so there wouldn't be much point.

Like I said, I don't like slaughtering or hunting for sport, and it might be in humanity's favor to actually go out an persue their meals for a change (at least for meat). Twas the cardiovascular workout of the Stone Age.

The Stone Age was awful. There was segregation and no toothpaste. Plus, people died young and were really short.

As for why it's the 'killing animals makes it okay to kill other humans' thing... it's just natural instinct not to deliberately kill members of your own species.

Yes, that's the whole point. We've evolved, we shouldn't be using instinct anymore. So we either give up the not kill fellow humans instinct, or the eat meat instinct.

I don't see why not eating other animals would put an end to war. There's still gonna be the domination factor in humans thanks to pure instinct.

It would make it harder for people to kill things. Many wars have been justified by the idea that the enemy is sub-human, ie an animal.

[Overconfidence]

We should really know better. It's not neccesery anymore, and I really do believe that underneath all the myths about where food comes from there is something truly primeval and horrible about that whole idea. You're eating a corpse.

It's not necessary. Really? Do you think that every person in the world could get enough protein if we all stopped eating meat? Are plants not alive, too? How 'alive' does something have to be?

[dcLx]

Finally man someone points that out...Thats messed up but still

[Alakhriveion]

Yes, that's the whole point. We've evolved, we shouldn't be using instinct anymore. So we either give up the not kill fellow humans instinct, or the eat meat instinct.

Back up, no. We have by no MEANS evolved past needing to eat meat, nor needing war.

[SteveT]

Back up, no. We have by no MEANS evolved past needing to eat meat, nor needing war.

Not eat meat?

You know who else didn't eat meat?

SATAN

[Alakhriveion]

Not eat meat?

You know who else didn't eat meat?

SATAN

Also Hitler and April-Fool's Maddox.

[Nevermind]

We need to eat meat so much that we make far too much for ourselves in the first place and most of it goes to waste. In our side of life at least.

[Kwicky Koala]

It's not necessary. Really? Do you think that every person in the world could get enough protein if we all stopped eating meat? Are plants not alive, too? How 'alive' does something have to be?

Well, I'm sure you certainly could. So forget everyone else in the world, because that isn't really relevant. And the plant point is ridiculous, and designed to stop people from doing anything at all. I'm not going to make it a secret that pesticides used on plants kill millions of insects. But that stuff is going on anyway. You really can't argue that things will be bad whatever, because then you'll never get anything done.

Back up, no. We have by no MEANS evolved past needing to eat meat, nor needing war.

I have.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

It's ridiculous to believe animals are worth the same as humans. Simply animals don't have feelings and can't think. From a biological point of view, each species does its best to preserve itself, so it's natural that humans believe to be more valuable than animals. While animals may experience pain, they don't suffer, it's just a reaction to an environmental stymulus to guarantee the individual's survival. Animal's only function is to preserve life on earth. What has atributed animals false feelings are humans themselves.

Now that's a ridiculous statement. If you tread on a dog's tail, will it not yelp in pain?

Your argument can just as easily be applied to human beings. All pain is a reaction to an environmental stimulus to guarantee the individual's survival. If you were to stab me in the hand right now, you would see signs of pain. But how would you know that I was actually feeling pain? You can't. You merely think I'm in pain, because you are attributing human feelings to me because I share similar outward characteristics to you. I could be nothing more than a biological robot, just like the animals you think of, and your attribution of feelings to me could be unjustified.

Likewise, if I were to stab you in the hand, how would I know you were really suffering? How would I know that you were really feeling pain, merely because you displayed outward characteristics that are similar to mine? Assuming you feel pain because I would feel pain if I were stabbed in the hand, could be wholly unjustified.

However, as someone who has seen the options, it is insane to think that there are current alternatives to animal testing. There aren't as of yet. All these protestors I see, however, aren't contributing much in the way of providing alternatives. All they do is bitch and whine. Can't they see that it's the Governments and the public that want animal testing? If it were up to the companies, they'd cancel the costly animal testing in order to save money.

[spunky-monkey]

I would rather a human die than an animal. Very bluntly. Animals are weak, animals do not deserve to suffer. They do nothing to hurt people, they cannot be selfish; they're just being themselves.

If I had a say in the Universe, neither would have to die, but I'm afraid you're wrong to say animals don't hurt people, because of course they do, they are animals.

Alakhriveion I'm vegetarian *thunder* because I don't like to see animals killed for their meat, nuff said. Of course people can get by without killing, its just some people WANT to have meat and WANT to kill, that's their choice at the end of the day...

And because a dog feels pain doesn't mean it has a soul, what a stupid thing to say, everything feels pain. Its when an animal lays down its life for you to save you that shows it really is special. Animals put their interests to live first, that's the part we have in common with them.

[Nevermind]

So an animal that risks it life for someone has a soul?

Dogs aren't called man's best friend for nothing. They are extremely loyal, and will show more loyalty to a person than a person will usually show to another person. At times, a dog will display more evidence of a soul than any human. Until you know the secrets of life and death, I doubt you will be able to discern what does and does not have a soul.

The only thing keeping us 'greater' than everything else is our way of thinking using logic rather than instinct. In current times human beings are far worse, far more savage, and far more bestial than any other creature on the planet. We just don't recognise it because we do it on a much more complex level. So, are we greater than everything else? No. But the potential is there.

[spunky-monkey]

Dogs aren't called man's best friend for nothing. They are extremely loyal, and will show more loyalty to a person than a person will usually show to another person. At times, a dog will display more evidence of a soul than any human. Until you know the secrets of life and death, I doubt you will be able to discern what does and does not have a soul.

First of all not everyone is a dog-lover so that quote is meaningless. Don't get me wrong I value all life, and dogs were just an example, but I have yet to see something that is "extraordinary" from such an animal. In fact I have only bad things to speak of, once some dumb ass let loose his dog on my littlest sister...what do I do? Kick it away, only to have the owner say "Aww, he's only playing".

...But you'd be wrong in thinking humans don't sacrifice themselves for others either. Everyone is quick to forget the Firemen...

[Wolf O'Donnell]

The only thing keeping us 'greater' than everything else is our way of thinking using logic rather than instinct.

And even that can be argued to be untrue. I would say the anti-metric movement in the UK and the US is illogical and based more on instinct than anything else (a tribal instinct of self). There are other things out there that I could claim to be more instinctual than logical, but I don't want to get bogged down into a completely different argument.