Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.
On the other hand, chickens just go about their selfish ways, ignoring humans and even ignoring other chickens around them. Fishes are the same. They seem to lack emotions, intelligence, memory, conscious. However, does that make it right for us humans to use this kind of animals for our own benefits? Are they here for the humans to eat and use? Were they made emotionless and without memory nor intelligence to make it easy for humans to use without guilt? Or, are all the above qualify as excuses we make from our survival instinct and the need for animal product food?

It's true that humans often prioritize their own well-being and the well-being of animals with which they share a close bond or connection. However, this does not mean that it is inherently justified to treat other living beings, such as chickens or fish, as lesser beings or to use them for our own benefit without considering their welfare.

The question of how we should treat animals hinges on a broader ethical debate. Some argue that animals, regardless of their perceived intelligence or emotional capacity, deserve moral consideration and should be treated with kindness and respect. Others contend that human needs and desires take precedence, and that the use of animals for food or other purposes is justifiable.

It is important to recognize that our actions and choices have consequences, not only for ourselves and our fellow humans but also for the world around us. Many people are becoming more aware of the ethical implications of using animals for food, clothing, or other purposes, and are making efforts to live more sustainably and compassionately.

As we continue to grapple with these complex ethical questions, it is crucial to engage in open and respectful dialogue. By doing so, we can gain a better understanding of the different perspectives and explore ways to create a more compassionate and sustainable world for all living beings.

[Sushan]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.

I offer this observation, as an example, referring to horses, as you have done. Horses are not "friendly animals", I don't think, in the sense that we and they are in some sense 'friends'.

Horses are held by us in captivity. They are forced to breed, live, and die in our service, in slavery. They are forced to carry heavy loads, and humans too. They are forced to behave as we wish them to behave. This may not be immediately obvious to humans, but if we were horses, I expect it would be crystal clear...?

You raise an interesting point about the nature of our relationship with animals like horses, which can be seen as a form of captivity and servitude. It's essential to consider the ethical implications of how we interact with and utilize animals for our own purposes, whether it be for work, transportation, or companionship.

As society evolves and our understanding of animal welfare and rights expands, we must continually reevaluate our relationships with animals and strive to minimize their suffering and ensure their well-being. It's important to acknowledge the power dynamics at play and work towards more equitable and respectful treatment of animals.

There are instances where humans have developed more compassionate relationships with animals, such as sanctuaries and rescue organizations, which prioritize the animals' well-being and provide them with a life free from suffering and exploitation. However, it is an ongoing challenge to balance our needs and desires as humans with the ethical treatment and welfare of animals.

[Sushan]

That's true. Humans are the most important species on the planet - they have abilities other living things can scarcely fathom. If there's a touch of tragedy in all this, it's that the results are not all too encouraging. A bit of an anticlimax that! Forward march!

It's true that humans possess unique abilities and intelligence compared to other species. However, our status as the dominant species on the planet also brings with it the responsibility to consider the impact of our actions on other living beings and the environment.

It's important to recognize that while humans may have a higher level of cognitive ability and the capacity for complex thought and problem-solving, this does not inherently give us the right to disregard the well-being of other living creatures. Instead, we should use our intelligence and empathy to work towards creating a world in which both humans and animals can coexist with minimal suffering.

In life and death situations, it's natural for us to prioritize our own species, as it is an instinctive response driven by our survival mechanisms. However, as conscious beings with the capacity for reason and empathy, we have the power to make deliberate choices to minimize harm to other living beings when it is within our means.

[Yasmine M]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.

I offer this observation, as an example, referring to horses, as you have done. Horses are not "friendly animals", I don't think, in the sense that we and they are in some sense 'friends'.

Horses are held by us in captivity. They are forced to breed, live, and die in our service, in slavery. They are forced to carry heavy loads, and humans too. They are forced to behave as we wish them to behave. This may not be immediately obvious to humans, but if we were horses, I expect it would be crystal clear...?

I agree with you Pattern-chaser about the relationship between horses and humans. By "friendly" I meant horses seem to accept their relationship with humans and most of the time they do not show agressivity toward us. But indeed when I think about it, horses live in captivity and are used by us. Although they have big outdoor spaces to gallop and roam around and although they are well taken care of (most of the time) by their owners, they are not completely free. That was a bad example I gave there. But my point remain, the observation that humans do not consider all living being at the same level.

[Pattern-chaser]

But my point remain, the observation that humans do not consider all living being at the same level.

Oh yes, we are in total agreement there!

[Sushan]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.

I offer this observation, as an example, referring to horses, as you have done. Horses are not "friendly animals", I don't think, in the sense that we and they are in some sense 'friends'.

Horses are held by us in captivity. They are forced to breed, live, and die in our service, in slavery. They are forced to carry heavy loads, and humans too. They are forced to behave as we wish them to behave. This may not be immediately obvious to humans, but if we were horses, I expect it would be crystal clear...?

I agree with you Pattern-chaser about the relationship between horses and humans. By "friendly" I meant horses seem to accept their relationship with humans and most of the time they do not show agressivity toward us. But indeed when I think about it, horses live in captivity and are used by us. Although they have big outdoor spaces to gallop and roam around and although they are well taken care of (most of the time) by their owners, they are not completely free. That was a bad example I gave there. But my point remain, the observation that humans do not consider all living being at the same level.

Your point is well-taken, and it's true that humans generally don't consider all living beings at the same level. This is partly due to cultural, social, and historical factors that have shaped our relationships with different animals. Our interactions with animals are often based on our needs, preferences, and emotional connections with them, rather than on objective criteria or ethical considerations.

It's essential for us to recognize this bias and work towards a more compassionate and informed understanding of our relationships with animals. By engaging in conversations like these, we can challenge our perspectives and strive to create a world where the interests and well-being of all living beings are taken into account.

As we continue to learn more about the complex inner lives of animals and their capacity for suffering, it's crucial that we reevaluate our practices and priorities to minimize harm and promote a more ethical coexistence with the other creatures that share our planet.

[Pattern-chaser]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.

I offer this observation, as an example, referring to horses, as you have done. Horses are not "friendly animals", I don't think, in the sense that we and they are in some sense 'friends'.

Horses are held by us in captivity. They are forced to breed, live, and die in our service, in slavery. They are forced to carry heavy loads, and humans too. They are forced to behave as we wish them to behave. This may not be immediately obvious to humans, but if we were horses, I expect it would be crystal clear...?

I agree with you Pattern-chaser about the relationship between horses and humans. By "friendly" I meant horses seem to accept their relationship with humans and most of the time they do not show agressivity toward us. But indeed when I think about it, horses live in captivity and are used by us. Although they have big outdoor spaces to gallop and roam around and although they are well taken care of (most of the time) by their owners, they are not completely free. That was a bad example I gave there. But my point remain, the observation that humans do not consider all living being at the same level.

Your point is well-taken, and it's true that humans generally don't consider all living beings at the same level. This is partly due to cultural, social, and historical factors that have shaped our relationships with different animals. Our interactions with animals are often based on our needs, preferences, and emotional connections with them, rather than on objective criteria or ethical considerations.

It's essential for us to recognize this bias and work towards a more compassionate and informed understanding of our relationships with animals. By engaging in conversations like these, we can challenge our perspectives and strive to create a world where the interests and well-being of all living beings are taken into account.

As we continue to learn more about the complex inner lives of animals and their capacity for suffering, it's crucial that we reevaluate our practices and priorities to minimize harm and promote a more ethical coexistence with the other creatures that share our planet.

We can disguise what we do, and what we have done, with words like "cultural" and "social factors", but the simple truth is that we uncaringly (ab)use any and every part of our world as we choose, for our own benefit, without regard for anything or anyone else. We are a sociopathic — or maybe even psychopathic? — species. There are no sound reasons or justifications for what we do, no matter what posh-sounding terms we use to euphemise our conduct.

[Sushan]

Humans matter the most to humans. I don't think we matter that much to other living being. The wolf pack will defend one of their own against humans. But the truth is that the humans do not consider all living being on the same level. Humans love and care for their house pets (dogs, cats, ...), their friendly animals such as horses. Basically, every animal that seems to interact and make a connection with humans is favored, loved and cared for. Most humans do not fancy eating dogs and cats.

I offer this observation, as an example, referring to horses, as you have done. Horses are not "friendly animals", I don't think, in the sense that we and they are in some sense 'friends'.

Horses are held by us in captivity. They are forced to breed, live, and die in our service, in slavery. They are forced to carry heavy loads, and humans too. They are forced to behave as we wish them to behave. This may not be immediately obvious to humans, but if we were horses, I expect it would be crystal clear...?

I agree with you Pattern-chaser about the relationship between horses and humans. By "friendly" I meant horses seem to accept their relationship with humans and most of the time they do not show agressivity toward us. But indeed when I think about it, horses live in captivity and are used by us. Although they have big outdoor spaces to gallop and roam around and although they are well taken care of (most of the time) by their owners, they are not completely free. That was a bad example I gave there. But my point remain, the observation that humans do not consider all living being at the same level.

Your point is well-taken, and it's true that humans generally don't consider all living beings at the same level. This is partly due to cultural, social, and historical factors that have shaped our relationships with different animals. Our interactions with animals are often based on our needs, preferences, and emotional connections with them, rather than on objective criteria or ethical considerations.

It's essential for us to recognize this bias and work towards a more compassionate and informed understanding of our relationships with animals. By engaging in conversations like these, we can challenge our perspectives and strive to create a world where the interests and well-being of all living beings are taken into account.

As we continue to learn more about the complex inner lives of animals and their capacity for suffering, it's crucial that we reevaluate our practices and priorities to minimize harm and promote a more ethical coexistence with the other creatures that share our planet.

We can disguise what we do, and what we have done, with words like "cultural" and "social factors", but the simple truth is that we uncaringly (ab)use any and every part of our world as we choose, for our own benefit, without regard for anything or anyone else. We are a sociopathic — or maybe even psychopathic? — species. There are no sound reasons or justifications for what we do, no matter what posh-sounding terms we use to euphemise our conduct.

It's true that humans have a long history of exploiting the environment and other living beings for our benefit, often without considering the ethical implications of our actions. However, it's important to remember that not all humans engage in these harmful behaviors, and there are many individuals and organizations working towards a more compassionate and sustainable coexistence with our planet and its inhabitants.

Recognizing the negative impact of our actions and the need for change is a crucial step towards improvement. By having discussions like this one, we can raise awareness, challenge our preconceptions, and work towards creating a more ethical and sustainable world.

While it's essential to be honest about our shortcomings as a species, it's also important to acknowledge the potential for positive change. There are countless examples of people who have dedicated their lives to the protection of animals, the environment, and the well-being of others. By supporting and amplifying these efforts, we can help to shift societal norms and create a more compassionate world for all living beings.

It's not too late to address our past mistakes and strive for a better future. By working together and embracing empathy, we can create meaningful change and ensure a more harmonious relationship with our planet and its inhabitants.