Value of life?

Question

Why do people value humanity more than animals, and in the same breath go on(and on) about not being cruel to animals, and treating them better than they sometimes treat themselves?

If people stopped seperating themselves from the world, accepted that the world DEPENDS on life and death, kindness and cruelty, and stopped forcing human IDEALS on non-human animalkind things would be much better off. Don't you think?

Sillyness...time is better spent talking of sealing wax...but, doesn't it come down to the basic Undeniable FACT that humans are animals. So we fight and **** and feed. Nothing about that is any worse than when a lion does it....it is finding MODERATION that is the human responsibilty...and that is a personal thing, not legislative. True?

Note: When I said to stop forcing "human ideals" I ment to stop saying things like horse slaughter(for the heavily overpopulated domstic horse) is cruel, but not even notice that wild horses kill each other with some regularity. "Bambi" is a Human invention and does not work in the real world. I'n the real world, bambi eats birds sometimes...

Answer 1

All life has value. We as beings are given the gift of sentience; we can (debatable) comprehend our own existence. It could be what we must do is not view the world in concrete terms but rather by the virtues that make us human; honor, obligation, love and compassion. If we see the world in these terms people would come to realize their interdependency and understand the base of our existence and get a better idea of where we should be going. We all share this minute celestial body. When you get any social group together they create a social contract it is based on our need for self preservation, this contract is our form of societal moderation. It must also be said that too many people are so preoccupied with their “afterlife” that they fail to really examine their place in this world.

Answer 2

Well I disagree with "humans are animals. So we fight and **** and feed. Nothing about that is any worse than when a lion does it." For one your only speaking of basic natural needs and instincts. How can a human compare to a lion? A lion lives it's live the way nature intended, surival of the fittest. I believe in nature there is no good or evil just balance. When it comes to humanity there is no balance. We are at the top of the food chain. We kill animals but animals are not allowed to kill us because if they do we kill more of them. Example, Steve Irwin dies of sting ray barb which was an accident of a natural defence for the animal. After his death people went out and deliberately killed innocent sting rays.
When an animal kills an animal it may not be considered humane. However the death normally happens quickly and some animals have ways to lessen the trama and pain. At least the animal got to live it's life freely before it's death. Humans can be such sick and twisted beings when it comes to death. Slaughter houses where animals live horrible lives until their death. Sometimes their death comes with such pain, like getting skinned while still alive. How many animals have died and gone to waste because humans are wasteful? How about the fur trade. Animals kept in small cages without food or water. Sometimes turning on each other for food. Only to have their head smashed open or be anally electracuted. How about animal testing. Needless testing of cosmetics. Unacurate needless testing of medicines.
You may only see a need for moderation but I see a need for balance. Humans are responsible for the harm we have done to non-human animals and the planet. All the non-human animals in the world could not compare to what humans alone have done.

Answer 3

You talk about not 'seperating' ourselves from the world, but I do believe that you yourself are mistaken in interpreting this 'separation'. Because human beings ARE animals, as you point out, our ideals cannot be wholly divested or seperated from the ideals of animals in general. In other words, our desire for a nice 2 story bungalow in a nice neighborhood is the wolf equivalent of a rocky den in an isolated part of the forest, difficult for predators (bears, humans, etc) to reach. Also, your bi-lateral viewpoint (life/death, kindness/cruelty) is one that is particular to human beings. Wolves, and all animals for that matter, do not exhibit 'cruel' or 'kind' behavior because their behavior is dictated by their biological functions. In other words, wolves eat rabbits because rabbits taste good and wolves need to eat. A wolf, however, will kill only enough to feed itself, or its young, and wolves only kill their own kind in extreme self-defense. Cruelty exists in animals only to the extent that human beings have interacted with, and forced it upon, them. When human beings learn that teaching cruelty leads to cruelty, whether to animals or themselves, then the world will be better off.

Answer 4

If humans are animals, then isn't it okay for animals to kill other animals? That's nature right?

The way you write this is confusing.

PS- if it's gonna cure human diseases, i say do whatever to rats/monkeys/whatever.......

Answer 5

good argument but man is incapable of placing them selves on the same level as animals.....

Answer 6

BRAVO!!