Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Hman/Non-Human Animals
There are many distinguishing differences between human and non-human animals. The biggest issue is a moral one. Human animals do not eat eachother to survive, we do not have to, but I strongly believe that if we had to we would not accept that and we would come up with a different way to survive. We are able to change throughout time and adapt easily. Animals hunt and eat eachother because they have accepted that as their way of life and do not care to change the way their world works. Morally, in my opinion, animals are wrong that they feed off of each other. As the human race we have rules and decided that that is not ok. This makes us most different from animals because we in that way, band together and they do not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Humans don't eat each other just like animals don't eat each other. When animals are apart of the same family (whether it be humans, dogs, or any other animal) they do not kill the same type of animal. So in that idea, would it be safe to assume that animals also have morals as well? In the Article "New Evidence of Animal Consciousness" Griffin talks about how animals show mental signs recording to stimuli much like humans in moral situations. However in the sense that they eat other animals isn't the case of morality, its survivability.
I agree strongly with Michael's comment. Animals do not eat other animals that are in their family, just like we as humans don't. Instead, Humans use their superiority to kill and eat other animals such as pigs, cattle, chickens, and so much more. Of course, Humans do not go out into the jungle and hunt for tigers and eat the them, but what we do is no different than what animals do, SURVIVE. We as humans do whatever it is that we need to do in order to survive. Whether that is killing other animals, or growing crops; we have transformed our food production into a multibillion dollar industry, so saying that humans have more morals then animals is not a proven fact at all. Yet, in the "New Evidence of Animal Consciousness" Griffen explains very well how animals too, in a way, have the same moral standards as humans.
I disagree with your argument on several points. To begin with, we hunt just like animals do. The only difference is that most humans do not stand witness to the actual brutality of the kill. There are countless animals murdered everyday for the needs of humans, just check the meat selection of any grocery store. Also, it typically goes that the stronger and more powerful eat the weaker animals. That does not necessarily mean that animals are killing their own species for food, but other classes of animals, which is precisely what we as humans do. Finally, I think that if all other forms of nourishment had somehow disappeared and all that was left was humans, it would be survival of the fittest. It is sick and horrifying to even think about, but I believe that people will do what they must to survive. We referenced this earlier in the year when we discussed the men who had been stuck on the island. They ate the little boy so that they could survive to live another day. I think it is silly to say that humans are superior to that of animals. We both feed off of other species to satisfy our needs. The only distinction is that humans attempt to conceal the killing from the general public.
I disagree with this post, humans could easily eat another human to survive if it came to that. In the right state of mind one human could think another human is food. And also animals of one species don't eat animals of their own species. They eat other animals, and we do the same. Just like a lion eats a gazelle we eat a pig or a cow. We are the same as nonhuman animals on the most basic level.
Post a Comment