Steelmage99
New Member
leroy said:but why in a limited sense? why are humans more important than animals, plants or bacteria?
Yes, I believe that humans are more important to me than animals, plants or bacteria.
I can think of several factors that I believe has influenced that stance;
1. Bias. I am a member of the human race, so I cannot escape a certain bias. Placing importance in your own race (humankind) is a survival mechanism.
2. Human characteristics. Human's intelligence, our tool use, our nuanced sense of feelings and desires and, not least, our well-developed language (allowing us have complex communication with each other about the aforementioned characteristics) sets us apart from all other animals.
The fact that we can use an electronic device to communicate use a huge network is an indication of how we are different.
Our ability to use acquired knowledge to strategize and plan about issues or problems that we have never encountered before also sets us apart. Our ability to communicate (both verbally and in writing) helps immensely in that. We can learn from almost anybody irrespective of place and time.
All of the above allows humans to have a greater impact, good or bad, on the world than other animals - making us more important.
3. Societal rules. We have moved beyond pure instincts, putting us in a different position than other animals. Some social animals seems to have some sort of social conventions, but nothing as complicated as we have. For instance we have developed a system of law that tries to have punishments fitting the crime and engendering a sense of justice in the group/tribe/country.
We don't simply have the strongest or the entire tribe punish a trespasser of the societal rules by beating them or killing them. We attempt to dispassionately and objectively determine guilt (if any) and allow the accused to defend themselves and argue their case.
This makes us special (and more important) compared to other animals and forms of life.
should we kill 10 wolves just to save a single human being? .............if yes..............why?
Yes. See above.
No, I would not. I do not reduce the "value" (however you want to measure it) of a human being to a societal cost/benefit analysis. The thought of such a way of thinking or a society based on such principles is rather terrifying.and what if this single human is an old man, that consumes more products and services than what he produces?.............(his net contribution to society is negative).........would you change your answer?
my point is why are you putting humans in a special category, as if humans where different from other animals in a meaningful way?
Because I believe that humans (while animals) ARE different from other animals in a meaningful way.
the question was originally for Laurens, but others are free to answer,
Why did you quote me then? Did you pose the same question to Laurens earlier?