The Value Of Living Creatures

[arh]

Are all humans equal (i.e. of the same value)? If you compare the leader of a people (a good leader, that is) to the common man - is the latter inferior to the first? In other words, do you think all people are worth the same, no matter what, or is your value based on what actions you take in your life? Why? Then, what about the value of an infant? Are humans more worth than animals? Would you kill three grown elephants to save the life of a newborn human baby? Would you deem it morally correct? Why? I'd like honest, explanational answers, please. I'd like to know what people think, and why. Also, if your feelings tell you one thing and your brain another, that too would be nice to know And please, don't reply in haste. Think it through!

[Universal Mind]

Innocent (meaning "innocent for the most part") humans are first on my list. However, a large number of innocents is worth more than a smaller number of innocents. All innocent individual humans are of equal value, no matter how powerful or unpowerful. One innocent human is worth more than all of the other animals in the world combined, aside from the need of the animals to keep the innocent human masses allive and well. If I am on a bridge and suddenly twenty dogs jump right in front of me and one person jumps into the other lane, I'm not swerving. The truly evil humans are worth less than the other animals. They are worth less than trees. They are worth less than mud.

[Quartz]

Innocent (meaning "innocent for the most part") humans are first on my list. However, a large number of innocents is worth more than a smaller number of innocents. All innocent individual humans are of equal value, no matter how powerful or unpowerful. One innocent human is worth more than all of the other animals in the world combined, aside from the need of the animals to keep the innocent human masses allive and well. If I am on a bridge and suddenly twenty dogs jump right in front of me and one person jumps into the other lane, I'm not swerving. The truly evil humans are worth less than the other animals. They are worth less than trees. They are worth less than mud.[/b] So what about the somewhat evil people? What about someone who is evil, has done a lot of crap but is about to change his ways? There arn't just innocent and evil people.

[Universal Mind]

So what about the somewhat evil people? What about someone who is evil, has done a lot of crap but is about to change his ways? There arn't just innocent and evil people.[/b] That's why I used the terms "for the most part" and "truly". A truly evil person does not change his ways. If you research the rehabilitation failures of people with Antisocial Personality Disorder, you will see what I mean. A somewhat evil person is still innocent for the most part.

[arh]

One innocent human is worth more than all of the other animals in the world combined, aside from the need of the animals to keep the innocent human masses allive and well.[/b] Can you specify why you think this? Also, do you regard some animals higher than others, or are all the same?

[Universal Mind]

Can you specify why you think this? Also, do you regard some animals higher than others, or are all the same?[/b] It has to do with the fact that I am a human and that humans seem much more significant to me than the other animals. Also, humans are by far the most cognitively complex of the animals. They understand their lives by far the best, remember their pasts by far the best, have major dreams about their futures, grieve for each other's deaths for long periods, and value their lives by far the most because they understand it so well. Life has much more meaning to a human (except the truly evil ones) than it does to any other species. I do value some animals more than others. It is very hard to objectify morality, but my view has something to do with intellectual and emotional complexity. An elephant means much more to me than an ant. I couldn't kill a deer for any selfish reason except to save my life, but I won't think twice about killing a roach. What is your stance?

[arh]

It is very hard to objectify morality, but my view has something to do with intellectual and emotional complexity.[/b] I agree very much. However, I think it is difficult determining what is the most complex creature. To me, humans are animals, but some more like animals than others (read: simple minded, reacting on instincts). I disagree with the notion that humans are the only animals tinking in complex terms, dreaming, and reflecting on their lives; both dolphins and elephants are extremely intelligent (hence the elephant example), possibly more intelligent than ourselves - and why shouldn't they be? Also, to think that only humans have language is, to me at least, somewhat absurd, and a good example of the 'human arrogance' encountered almost daily. Thinking that life has more meaning to a human than other species is unfounded, and impossible to know. Actually, I'd label such a stance as extremism. I think people are worth whatever they make themselves worth - that is, a person striving to live a 'moral life' (being good to others as well as themselves, basically) is superior to those not caring for others, or worse, being cruel. Now, to be honest, I'd save three elephants and kill the baby. It is innocent, yes, but the elephants have a life, a mind, experiences and social ties that far precede that of the baby which, frankly, is little more but a bunch of instincts. Call me cruel, but that's my stand. And I find it terrifying that people still, in this modern age, prizes the life of a human above all others, regardless of its mass and complexity. It's a good thing when trying to survive, but when having the power of technology, and ultimately the responsibility for maintaning Earth and life in general, it's extremely frightening. I'm not trying to correct you or something like that, but you asked for my stance. I was hoping not to have to say it, but I found it kind of rude not to since you asked

[Chaos]

I tend to think instinct plays more of a part in this than anything else. Humans are generally more caring toward humans than other animals b/c it is their instinct to be more caring toward humans. Its the same for all of the animals. Monkeys tend to care about other monkeys, cats care more about other cats, etc... Can you specify why you think this? Also, do you regard some animals higher than others, or are all the same?[/b] I also think humans have conditioned themselves over the years to value cute and cuddly animals over other animals that aren't so cute. You have to confess that the majority of people would save a kitten before they would even think of saving a snake. Though as to why we consider a kitten cute and a snake terrifying, (actually, I think they're cute, but I'm one of few) I don't know. Perhaps b/c in the past a lot of people were killed by things like poisonous snakes, bears, and whatever else, and therefore passed on an instinct for us to be immediately afraid of these things.

[King and God]

Are all humans equal (i.e. of the same value)? If you compare the leader of a people (a good leader, that is) to the common man - is the latter inferior to the first? In other words, do you think all people are worth the same, no matter what, or is your value based on what actions you take in your life? Why? Then, what about the value of an infant? Are humans more worth than animals? Would you kill three grown elephants to save the life of a newborn human baby? Would you deem it morally correct? Why? I'd like honest, explanational answers, please. I'd like to know what people think, and why. Also, if your feelings tell you one thing and your brain another, that too would be nice to know And please, don't reply in haste. Think it through! [/b] The valuation of life is completely subjective. I personally value myself, my family members, my friends and my pets highest. I would rather have a million unknown humans die than my cat or dog. I would rather have a million unknown humans die than any of the individuals (including my pets) I value highest. All individuals I do not know of I value little - humans and animals alike.

[Universal Mind]

I agree very much. However, I think it is difficult determining what is the most complex creature. To me, humans are animals, but some more like animals than others (read: simple minded, reacting on instincts). I disagree with the notion that humans are the only animals tinking in complex terms, dreaming, and reflecting on their lives; both dolphins and elephants are extremely intelligent (hence the elephant example), possibly more intelligent than ourselves - and why shouldn't they be? Also, to think that only humans have language is, to me at least, somewhat absurd, and a good example of the 'human arrogance' encountered almost daily. Thinking that life has more meaning to a human than other species is unfounded, and impossible to know. Actually, I'd label such a stance as extremism.[/b] Humans are not the only animals thinking in complex terms, but we think in by far the most complex terms. I also think most animals can communicate. They just don't have anywhere near the intellectual and emotional complexity humans have, and therefore don't understand and value their existences like humans do. Thinking that ants and rats have the same level of life understanding and valuing humans have is maniacally fanatical extremism. Do cockroaches grieve for years and years and develop mental conditions when their offspring die? No, they eat them. Now, to be honest, I'd save three elephants and kill the baby. It is innocent, yes, but the elephants have a life, a mind, experiences and social ties that far precede that of the baby which, frankly, is little more but a bunch of instincts. Call me cruel, but that's my stand. And I find it terrifying that people still, in this modern age, prizes the life of a human above all others, regardless of its mass and complexity. It's a good thing when trying to survive, but when having the power of technology, and ultimately the responsibility for maintaning Earth and life in general, it's extremely frightening.[/b] Now, THAT is extremism. No offense, but if I ever have kids, you will DEFINITELY not be baby sitting them. Elephants are some of the most complex animals on the planet, but they are nowhere near our level. Interestingly, they are one of the few types of animal that actually grieve over the deaths of other ones. Still, they are not on our level of intelligence, awareness, or sentimentality. Do you think they reflect on their own existences and philosophize about why the are here? Do you think they have complex dreams about their futures? Our complexity results from how our use of tools became our evolutionary advantage. Look how far we have come with that. That push is what gave us by way far the most complex brains of all of the animals. Elephants don't require that much intelligence, so there was no reason for it to evolve that much. They just hang around, being naked and not using tools. There is no possiblity whatsoever that you are going to get a dolphin or an elephant to chime in on this conversation with any kind of communication technique. They are worlds below the human level. The killing of a human causes much more of a mind loss and much more pain in the world than the killing of any other type of animal. There is no comparison.

[arh]

I personally value myself, my family members, my friends and my pets highest. I would rather have a million unknown humans die than my cat or dog.[/b] Good point. But if you were to do an 'objectional' analysis? I also think most animals can communicate. They just don't have anywhere near the intellectual and emotional complexity humans have, and therefore don't understand and value their existences like humans do. Thinking that ants and rats have the same level of life understanding and valuing humans have is maniacally fanatical extremism.[/b] Our complexity results from how our use of tools became our evolutionary advantage. Look how far we have come with that. That push is what gave us by way far the most complex brains of all of the animals. Elephants don't require that much intelligence, so there was no reason for it to evolve that much. They just hang around, being naked and not using tools.[/b] First, I never said ants and rats have the same level of understanding as us. There are of course differences. But you can't just take it for granted that other animals are not as complex (or more complex) than ourselves. In practice, humans aren't that smart. Our great societal and technological achievements stem from our collective intelligence, which is where our strength really lies. Sure, it's easier for us to use tools, and this of course enhances our intellect in those aspects, but it by no means give our EQ a boost. We care for others, as we are a pack animal. But so are other species as well. If you think of the stoneage humans, you wouldn't say they where just as intelligent as the modern man. But, frankly, the genes are the same, and it's the society which fosters higher thinking, not ourselves. Put a baby in the bush and wait twenty years. If it survives, you'll find no Einstein. So, to sum up, the human culture is the most intelligent species/entity in the world. We are but single cells, intelligent, but far from the level of excellence we claim to be. There is no possiblity whatsoever that you are going to get a dolphin or an elephant to chime in on this conversation with any kind of communication technique. They are worlds below the human level.[/b] They can't, because they don't speak human languages. But they do speak in their own languages, which we don't understand. We can partly analyze it for complexity, but that's all (and when we do, we find highly complex languages in some species). The school of "I don't understand it, therefore it's silly" is sadly dominating, but that doesn't make it true. Do you think they reflect on their own existences and philosophize about why the are here? Do you think they have complex dreams about their futures?[/b] I don't know. No-one does. One can but guess. Humans are not the only animals thinking in complex terms, but we think in by far the most complex terms.[/b] Again, this is an unfounded statement. To us, we seem like the most intelligent because we know ourselves best. But we don't know enough to assert it, it just feels right. And we're of course happy with it, being "number one" and all. But really, it's arrogance. Until we know, we'd better be more humble (although that probably won't happen). So, maybe you're right, maybe you're not. I can understand the concept of valuing humans higher than other animals - of course, we value our own more than others - but more than all the animals in the world? Or a hundred thousand, for that matter? Don't you see the dangers of such emotion?

[Universal Mind]

First, I never said ants and rats have the same level of understanding as us. There are of course differences. But you can't just take it for granted that other animals are not as complex (or more complex) than ourselves. In practice, humans aren't that smart. Our great societal and technological achievements stem from our collective intelligence, which is where our strength really lies. Sure, it's easier for us to use tools, and this of course enhances our intellect in those aspects, but it by no means give our EQ a boost. We care for others, as we are a pack animal. But so are other species as well. If you think of the stoneage humans, you wouldn't say they where just as intelligent as the modern man. But, frankly, the genes are the same, and it's the society which fosters higher thinking, not ourselves. Put a baby in the bush and wait twenty years. If it survives, you'll find no Einstein. So, to sum up, the human culture is the most intelligent species/entity in the world. We are but single cells, intelligent, but far from the level of excellence we claim to be. They can't, because they don't speak human languages. But they do speak in their own languages, which we don't understand. We can partly analyze it for complexity, but that's all (and when we do, we find highly complex languages in some species). The school of "I don't understand it, therefore it's silly" is sadly dominating, but that doesn't make it true. I don't know. No-one does. One can but guess. Again, this is an unfounded statement. To us, we seem like the most intelligent because we know ourselves best. But we don't know enough to assert it, it just feels right. And we're of course happy with it, being "number one" and all. But really, it's arrogance. Until we know, we'd better be more humble (although that probably won't happen). So, maybe you're right, maybe you're not. I can understand the concept of valuing humans higher than other animals - of course, we value our own more than others - but more than all the animals in the world? Or a hundred thousand, for that matter? Don't you see the dangers of such emotion?[/b] My valuing of humans over all other animals is emotional because that is the way humans are generally programmed, but part of the programming is based on objective facts. I don't merely "feel" that we are by far the most complex. I have seen the results and know the basis of them. Our tool advancement is not just an area where we are superior. It is also an area which evolved and brought intellectual complexity in many areas along with it due to the resulting brain development. The communication patterns of monkeys, gorillas, dolphins, whales, dogs, cats, and all of the other animals that would even be considered for being compared to humans and lots of other animals have been studied on major levels. I have yet to see anything suggesting that another species can write Faulkner level novels, create John Lennon or Amadeus Mozart level music, create M.C. Escher level works of art, write Aristotle level philosophy, land a remote control robot on Mars, predict the weather for the next week, figure out or even understand the laws of math, etc. I have seen no proof. Not only have I not seen the proof. I have seen proof that those animals are not up to par with us. Some of the cognitive psychology teachings I learned about in college used chimpanzee studies to illustrate the general structures and how humans and chimpanzees compare. Human superiority is proven beyond all doubt. There are all kinds of ways to communicate, including pointing and leading, and I don't see human level communication or other cognitive activity that comes anywhere near the human level in other species. Do you have any reason to suggest there is some other kind of species that compares? Saying there might be for all we know is not the same as actual evidence, and the evidence suggests otherwise. On top of that, I see no reason why such intellectual complexity would have evolved in the other animals. I can see why it would have in humans. Our tool advancement is part of it, and so is the collective nature of our social adaptation. We have to be multi-talented. Our minds have to be really complex. There are many aspects to human social life, and humans are covering them. We do require development to bring that about, but the potential is in our genes. When I see the slightest sign that an elephant has contemplated suffering preceding dying of old age because it has philosophized the disappointment of eternal nonexistence after considering its long term dreams and visions of life purpose, I will reconsider. If just one dolphin figures out a cure for a dolphin disease because it has contemplated the emptiness of losing a family member it has so many deep memories of profound communication and shared dreams with, I will start my thinking on this all over.

[CryoDragoon]

I think all animals, plants, and even the smallest of lifeforms must be respected... The value of all things are equal, because we are all part of the same thing called "nature"... I think that you shouldn't kill anything when it's unneccessary: That's why you won't see me smash a bug... I'll just whipe it away or something... But I won't kill. It might sound strange to you maybe, but when I smash a fly for whatever reason, I feel guilty... Simply because they were alive, and had every right to live, as much as we do. There is, however a difference between needlessly killing and killing with a reason. For example: In order to survive, we (as any other creature) must eat one creature or another... That's to ensure our survival, that is "killing" with a reason, and it is justified. I think all humans are equal, as a human... However, their personality are not. A person with the down syndrome, a truly evil person, and a truly good person are equal in human-ness They all have their right to live... but their personalities aren't the same. Therefore, it is justified to treat them all in a different way. The truly evil person is much, MUCH less than the other two in personality, and it is therefore justified to punish him in one way or another. I am, however, against the death penalty for the reason described above... In short: In essence/substance, all living creatures are equal and should be treated with respect, but the (in philosophy so-called) "accidents" (the properties that are not substance, i.e. those we can perceive about something, such as the appearance, personality, etc.) are not, and may differ in such a way that said creature may be punished or treated differently. Needless killing must be avoided, as all creatures are equal and should be treated with respect, but when it is absolutely necessary for survival, it is justified, whatever said creature may be. Also, as long as creatures are treated in the way described above, i.e. EQUAL... then they may be adopted as pets... or even "slaves" (we are all slaves, you know... We work for people higher than us, but they treat us equal (or at least, as equal as it gets), and therefore, that IS justified... The slavery of the days gone past we all know of, however, are extrenely unequal and disrespectful, and therefore, that kind of slavery is NOT justified). We are all part of nature, just like bacteriae and plants, but we are just a bit more evolved, we are more concious than dogs and apes, and yet it seems like they are more "part of nature" than we are... They don't wage wars and "enslave" other creatures (look at the zoo's, for example, I do not believe that they are treated equal, or with as much love as, say, a dog in a loving family, but I may be wrong too)... It seems they value life more... For as much as their instinct lets them, anyway... We are all part of that same Nature... Now let's start acting like that... And that is my view about the value of life... I hope I have made my points as clear as glass, and that no misinterpretations can be made... Or something...

[Universal Mind]

I think all animals, plants, and even the smallest of lifeforms must be respected... The value of all things are equal, because we are all part of the same thing called "nature"...[/b] So if you're driving over a bridge and a kid steps in front of you and a dog steps beside the kid in the other lane, are you going to swerve? Have you ever been to a human funeral? Have you seen what parents, siblings, grandparents, and other relatives go through when kids die? I'm not saying you haven't. I'm just setting up the next point. The amount of pain in the world caused by the death of a dog is much smaller and shorter than the pain in the world caused by the death of a kid or pretty much any other innocent human. The death of a tree causes no pain in the world, unless a crazy person was worshipping it or thought it was a person or something.