Does having a higher level of intelligence give humans the right to exploit other animals?

Question

I've heard some people argue that humans have the right to do whatever they damned well please to other animals simply because they possess a higher order of intelligence. That being said, though, it should also be noted that there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, there are some humans who are either so profoundly retarded or so brain damaged that they can't function beyond the level of a newborn baby, whereas the typical pig is said to possess the intelligence of the average three-year-old child. If we use the argument that our higher level of intelligence gives us the right to exploit other animal species, then could it also be argued that we should be able to do whatever we damned well please to a person who is profoundly retarded or brain damaged? And for that matter, couldn't it also be argued that we should leave profoundly retarded or brain damaged humans at the mercy of higher functioning animals?

Answer 1

Does having a higher level of intelligence give humans the right to exploit other animals?

Indeed, have humans won some war against nature, for this, "To the victors, go the spoils!" declaration?

I recognize that there are some who do believe such a right exists and it is theirs. The master/slave paradigm has been with us throughout history; consider how ingrained the "plantation mentality" is, in the American society. The master, the C.E.O., the government, even the pundit, knows best. Divisions based on genealogy, royalty/commoner, civilized/savage, protestant/catholic, male/female, blue eyes/brown eyes, etc. are designed to keep people divided and distracted. The status quo maintained. The sheeple repeat the mantra, "Survival of the fittest", not knowing their right to survive is in jeopardy. The history of Eugenics, especially in America, provides an uncomfortably revealing projection into the present.

I believe humanity has a choice. We can choose to spread the tools necessary for more existing humans to experience life as a gift. We can choose to act as stewards, to care for and tend to the planet, for the benefit of all. Above all, we can choose to tend to the suffering of all living beings. We can choose to accept nothing less than humane rights and then, act accordingly.
Persevere.

Answer 2

Humans are animals too. Humans are only more intelligent than other animals, this has nothing to do with the other qualities you mention (except curiosity, but humans are very curious as well, just as other more intelligent animals, like pigs). Humans are also very maternal and many also paternal, some species are more so than humans this has to do with their evolution. Take our closest cousins: chimpanzees, mothers are maternal, but the males aren't very much so. Our evolution has led us to be more or less monogamic, but not completely, like in swans, probably there was not enough time. Also you call animals innocent, I think it is an empty phrase if they can't express their beliefs and tell you what they think. Is a cat innocent when it kills a bird? I think so, since the cat cannot reflect and think: Well, what am I doing to this bird, will it feel pain if I catch it? etc. etc.. So the cat can never be called "guilty" of something, even not so when it delibarately poops on the couch... yuck... Just some thoughts :-)

Answer 3

Possessing a higher order of intelligence gives you no more rights than what common since dictates. Any life form is due the respect of living it's life in peace. We shouldn't tamper with the natural order of life. Some things are weak and some are strong.The strong should help the weak to survive. Everything living is part of the food chain. I'm glad we are toward the top, however that doesn't give us the right to tamper with those things that are not.

Answer 4

Having the means does not always justify the end.

There are scenarios where dominion over animals is exercised in the name of science. Too often license is taken which perverts this to other avenues leading to abusive behaviors toward animals.

While your contention that humans with profound retardation are protected while normal animals which function at a lower level are not is well taken; humanity as a species will continue to 'use and abuse' the animal kingdom; exploiting it to whatever our needs and/or whim may dictate is "suitable" use.

Animal rights will continue to be a cause -- and strides have been made toward than end. However, the needs of the humans will likewise continue to prevail until we are supplanted by an even higher species and become exploited by them ... if and when that may ever come to pass.

Answer 5

If it is some body's (unknown face) theory, it doesn't deserve a discussion since all sort of freak and irrational ideas may be entertained by the people...

But if you say that some schools of philosophy argue like that, then it is worth a discussion, since the basis for such a theory can be elicited from them and analyzed for a fair criticism..

I have known that people in every religion generally tend to interpret the words in the scriptures (messages of their Prophets) by reading them often out of context... were an error of sometimes serious nature may occur... For example, some people say that it is said in their holy scriptures that God had created "all the things" for the "use of man"... thereby justifying their use of everything in the manner they wish to...

On the other side, sometimes the religion says that killing animals is sin but the followers in a region would find it not possible to adhere.. (example, the Budhists in Tibet or such hostile places where vegetation - supplying food - is very less and people have to survive on animal food)...

But it is logical to expect people to avoid harming any living thing except under situations where it can not be avoided... Like sacrificing a village to save a country or a house to save a village or a member of family to save the family... as the Bible says... Just so, killing an animal to save one's life (from starvation) may be justified... However killing for pleasure is a shame on the human race... as higher intelligence should make one to be more compassionate (as some one had rightly answered in this column)...

Answer 6

No, our supposed higher intelligence should stop us from abusing or exploiting anything. We humans should not think that we are so special as to do anything we feel like to the weaker or less intelligent whether human or animal especially those that have no choice but to depend completely on us for everything.

Answer 7

This a difficult question by "exploit" I assume you mean "eat", I would argue that the premise first of all that we are equal to a pig is invalid.

I see where your coming from but, just like the Lion that runs down the gazelle is not necessarily superior intellectually rather he's hungry and he has the ability to eat the gazelle, this is a natural instinct not a man made behavior.

Answer 8

You are highlighting the huge potential for hypocrisy in humans - I am vegetarian and often ask people if they would eat severely mentally handicapped human beings and, of course, people find this question a little shocking... a higher level of intelligence can only be measured in human terms anyway and i think the biggest trick we've pulled is convincing ourselves that we're smarter than other animals... building tools and creating a society only to mess things up on a more grandiose scale hardly seems intelligent to me... but you are right.. by the reasoning that we are superior to animals we are superior to the mentally deficient in our society and should be able to eat them, or at least use them to carry stuff around... of course the very notion is morally reprehensible, and that SHOULD bring people who feel superior animals to look more closely at their beliefs... it undoubtedly won't though.

Answer 9

Your logic is not very intelligent; you are comparing apples to oranges by overlapping an absolutely lower order onto the bottom of an absolutely higher order. The same low-IQ argument could be made that if we don't treat inanimate minerals with compassion, we will treat people mercilessly too.

Answer 10

It's not intelligence - it's called the food chain and we are higher up on a food chain. I also don't believe that a pig has the IQ of a 3 year old. How did they test this and prove it? A 3yr can communicate, as can a mentally challenged person, where a pig can not.