Do humans really have a greater moral value than that of nonhumans (not rocks or tree, animals in particular)?

Question

Please refrain your arguments to secular ones as we don't all hold the same religious beliefs.

Do we hold the same intrinsic worth as that of animals, as we are merely just the animal with the greatest intellect as the consequence of natural processes? If so, then it would be just as wrong to kill a dog as it would a human.
Are we of more worth because our intellect allows us to be rational beings with a sense of morality? If this is the fundamental thing that makes humans of greater worth, does it follow those humans whom are incapable of being rational and holding a sense of morality are not part of this group (ie. the very mentally retarded, the cold blooded and the very selfish)?

You may come up with different reasons and different positions than the ones I've listed.

I said "not rocks or trees", I'm referring to animals with some degree of consciousness (for example a cow would count, a fly won't).

Meeeee! I'm referring to moral "value" and "worth" in this question. Would it be more wrong to kill a hundred men than a hundred primates? If morality is pure social construction, then worth is nothing more than a social construct. Thus a society who holds monkeys of greatest worth is no more wrong or right than a society that holds humans of greatest worth.

I'm not stating my position just yet so I am not saying that killing a human is not morally worse than killing a monkey.

ndmagicman morality is ethics, a sense of right and wrong.

Animals might not be evil, but they don't possess this sense nor distinguish.

brkshandilya's my question is of moral value/worth. The above two positions were possible justifications to be used for defending why humans have more value/worth.

I'm not endorsing any of the listed positions (they hold a contradictory view by the way).

Answer 1

no. humans cannot claim any high ground over animals. a lot of animals have been hunted and killed to near extinction for their monitary worth to people, people have been killed by others for not muh more than a mobile phone. animals kill to eat, and for no other reason. seems clear who has the higher moral values.

Answer 2

Humans do not have any greater moral values due to their merely being humans but they have the choice to have them along with many other traits, due to inherent sense of discrimination and differentiation.In the world of nature,all life forms have equal status though various practices have evolved in different societies over a period of time and found acceptance.I think your question has more to do with the right to life for all living beings than morality or character/conduct.

Answer 3

Objectively, maybe not. We don't even know thaat we are the most intelligent animal - it has been speculated that whales and dolphins are much more intelligent than we are.

I do think that morally we owe more to our own species than to others, but we owe respect to all of life. That doesn't mean I think it's necessarily wrong to eat animals, though. Nature's cycles depend on some animals feeding off of others. There might be good reasons to choose not to use animals for food, but I don't think it's a moral obligation, just a choice.

Answer 4

Actually, I think our "intellect" makes us worth less. Our intelligence has helped us damage the very environment we need to continue to survive. The same intelligence grants us the ability to commercially grow animals in inhumane environments and butcher them harshly so we can not just survive, but become gluttons.

An animal may only run on instinct... but it won't kill you for a $50 pair of "Nike's". So it can eat you maybe, if it's hungry enough. But not for fancy unimportant junk. Humans pretend we have "morality". The other animals actually have it.

Answer 5

Since we have no way to know the mind of an animal that is impossible to say. And exactly who is it that deems humans more moral than animals? Well humans give ourselves that distinction, whether true or false. Think about how often you've ever seen animals wage war against other animals and then tell me that humans are more intrinsically moral than animals.

Answer 6

Yes we are of more worth because of our intellect that allows us to be rational beings... We are held to a much high standard. For instance it's not accept within our society to eat our own or kill within our society. A pack of dogs knows that there is another sick within the pack and they kill it, however we try to aid our sick. We are held accountable to fed our children and give them a good upbringing. However, having this "higher intellect" I believe that we should also be held accountable to take care of our planet and the animals who are becoming extinct within it.

As far as the mentally challenged we should also be accountable to take care of them.

For murders, we should be held accountable to make sure they don't do it again.

For the very selfish... I think they just need to be loved a little more. : )

Answer 7

their are those who will say yes and no to this but i think it isn't really known as we dont know if they view things in the same way as us, but studdies are ongoing in this area and their are signs that their are some forms of what we would call altruism, so to answer we are better than them (animals) would be foolish. if we look at human history we can see values changed over time and the same could be true of animals as the needs they had grew. we may not agree with what our ancestord did but we can associate more with them as they are the same species but other species do comunicate within their group so to say they are beneith us is foolish.

Answer 8

As you said, we have intellect which allows us to be rational human beings with conscious choices,
animals however, act on pure instinct...
it doesn't make us *better*, or of more "worth" than animals, it just means we are more able to make coscious rational, informed, intellectual decisions.
We are no better than animals..."morals" are a human invention/creation & are not part of our natural order.

Answer 9

Why ask a question and restict how it can be answered? (What are you afraid of?)
The obvious answer is 'Yes' How can a non-sentient article, or a creature that reacts purely by instinct have morals?
Morality presupposes the ability to choose

Answer 10

Fundamentally we're all worth what, a few dollars or so if our bodies are distilled into their component elements?

I'd argue we're worth more based on our actions, what we've done and what we're willing to do to promote ourselves and others.