Register or Login

Question

133 responses | 2 votes

Sep 6, 2006 3:20:29 PM cite

Do we have the right to consider human beings as more valuable than other life forms?

by easygisi01

Related themes
Animal Rights,
Biosphere
Please login to rate.

May 4, 2008 4:30:51 PM cite

Survival. Food is made of animals & plants that eat each other, that need other organisms, that in turn need other organisms, in a complex web that we depend upon just to eat. The air and water we depend upon benefit from ecosystem services provided by all other life. Intelligence is in this design, and death is in countering the design. The bees that pollinate 'our' crops show us our direct dependence; we need so many other species in indirect ways. Like all food, air, and water, we are of this system, and what we do to it we do to ourselves, though it may be our innocent grandkids who reap what we sow. "The first rule of intelligent tinkering: keep all the parts." - Aldo Leopold Fisheries - A few species have collapsed because we exploited them as economic resources rather than as biological life forms with inherent value. Many more species of food fish are now under international management, limiting catches to avoid their collapse. Pirate fishing undercuts even these emergency limits. Farm species, both meat and grain, are kept from following the same pattern by intensive inputs derived & delivered from increasingly expensive oil. Farms surrounded by wilderness need fewer artificial inputs because of biological inputs from nearby wild species, but how many farms still have this support from life forms? If our "superior" choice is to remove wild species, that removes support from farms. Beyond the concerns with our food, we have less tangible needs to connect against loneliness toward membership in a whole, toward coherent meaning. The myth of our separateness threatens our survival.

by zotlynn

Please login to rate.

May 2, 2008 6:05:32 AM cite

If there were such things as true, inborn "rights," would it not then be impossible for anyone to take them away? If women, for example, had an inalienable "right" to vote, then how was this right alienated from them for so long? I think the more useful question is not in the form "Do we have the right to such and such?," but "Can we get away with it?" CAN we get away with continuing to treat the planet as if human life is more valuable than non-human life? CAN we get away with continuing to "consider" it this way? We are obviously CAPABLE of considering human beings as more valuable than other life forms, but does it behoove us to do so?

by iliketomeow

Related themes
Animal Rights,
Biosphere
Please login to rate.

Rights ? ? ? ?

May 3, 2008 10:33:43 PM cite

There are no 'Rights' in nature, this is strictly a concept that relates to Human society. Ever there the only 'rights' are those acknowledged by the majority. Human domination of nature is only by the consent or acquiescence of the masses of people and is done at our peril. Nature does not obey our laws and we will be subject to natural law. See my comment 'Seperate Creation' on Aug 2 '07 as it is relevant to this discussion. 'Inalienable Rights' are those created by society to protect all members of that society from other members. Nature has no regard for our 'Rights', not the animals, the mountains, or the weather. Ask anyone who has gotten into trouble in the wilderness. We are not in control as much as some my think. If an asteroid crashes into the Earth, what good will your 'Rights' do you then. For Humans to advance we must understand that hatred, bigotry, and violence have no place in society. As long as Greed, Lust and Disregard for others exist we will be stuck in this miserable excuse for society. We are here to share the planet with all other people and all other live forms.

by thedoc

Please login to rate.

Mar 22, 2008 5:44:29 PM cite

I think we owe our allegiance to other human beings first, but we should also respect other living things and preserve their lives as much as we can. We should be using our intelligence to preserve the earth instead of killing it and each other.

by tltalty

Please login to rate.

Jul 23, 2007 12:37:21 AM cite

We all have the same organs and are made up of the same feelings. We all have families. Every living thing on this planet has a right to feel loved and cared for, and should not be judged simply on what it is. If this was the case there would still be segregation when you think about it, because we are basing everything on looks or "kinds".

by botulism

Please login to rate.

Nov 2, 2006 5:04:51 PM cite

Human beings are superior in many ways. Between a person and an animal, one should chose to save the person. Yet, this must not come with an arrogance that makes us forget about the world around us. We have a tendency to think that we are so superior that it gives us the right to treat the environment and animals like things that don't deserve our respect or attention. This is the attitude that we must change.

by emahleb

Please login to rate.
  No by Foossa 0 votes

Sep 11, 2006 3:49:22 PM cite

The reason why I say no is simple: alot of humans dont even value or appreciate another human. Just because we think we can manipulate nature at our will, does not mean it is right or just. Our actions are based on our basic needs and demands. Just like an animal we want a peaceful life, always enough food and mabye a happy family. Humans are animals with more possibilities, tools and responsibility. A wild animal does not have a failure that we should judge. It's can and will only act by its instincts. Most animals exist far longer than us humans and we dare doubt and judge their nature, just because we think we are better? That's pathetic!

by Foossa

Please login to rate.

Sep 11, 2006 2:27:36 PM cite

There is no superiority of the man over the animals as we eat as they eat and they die as we die.

by miki99

Please login to rate.
  Yes by sharaf 0 votes

Sep 11, 2006 8:07:57 AM cite

Human beings, I believe is the masters on Earth. They possess the quality of reason and work towards higher objectives that no creature on earth does. The cognition and fine works of human beings has no parallel on earth. As if, the earth -with all it's richess- were created for human beings to serve a certain purpose and build civilizations. The fact that a group of mankind acts wrongly does not mean that the mankind -as a whole- are wrong.

by sharaf

Please login to rate.

Sep 10, 2006 12:51:26 AM cite

If it were not for the plants and animals that we eat we could not survive. All life forms are of EQUAL value.

by notcriswell

Related themes
Animal Rights,
Biosphere
Please login to rate.

Sep 9, 2006 5:05:54 PM cite

values in society are not static and change over time. Over the past millenium the category 'animals' included women (because the church knew they had no soul), black people, red indians and other non white/male human beings. The separation of animals and humans was decided by those in power and they were very fond of them selves and wanted therefore to have a special category for themself. Now the UN has included the great apes under the same rights as humans, so gradually we are correcting the misperceptions from the past! So to asnwer your question it depends on where you come from. Of course if you understand the relativity of your own value base the answer can only be NO.

by hendrik@druknet.bt

Please login to rate.