So a human life is more valuable than an animals?

Question

I've heard many people say this and they look at me like I'm crazy when I disagree. I believe that all animals including humans have an initial equal value. By that I mean in general the lives of all animals have equal value and no one species is more or less valuable than another. We all live on this Earth and can better or harm the world and those around. We all have our strengths and weaknesses. Most animals are physical stronger than us however we have higher intelligence. If you believe however that regardless human life is more valuable than any other animals, let me ask you a question.

If there was a fire and you had the choice to save either a human or a dog which do you save? The human you say, well what if that human was a serial killer and that dog was your pet? Still feel the same way? Now if you've changed your mind then you've contradicted yourself because of your initial statement that a human life is more valuable than another animals but now you say your pet's life is more valuable.

My point to this post is to give you another view on the matter. That view being that no animals life human or not is more valuable than another animals on the basis of life alone. It's the emotions we feel for that animal that make one animal more valuable than another, even if naturally most animals have a species prejudice. By stating that human life is more valuable than an animals life you are stating that every rapist, murderer, and pedophiles life are more valuable than your beloved pets. Do you truly feel this way? I highly doubt it. Is it not more logical and rational to say that some lives are more valuable than others regardless of species? I just want your opinions.

Answer 1

Honestly I don't believe humans are more valuable than animals. In fact we are animals just with more intelligence. Does our intelligence make us better than somebody else? People who believe themselves intelligent often treat a stupid person as if they are a lesser being. Most humans act the same way with animals. I think that it is a sign of low intelligence if one were to under appreciate a fellow human being or animal just because of their intelligence. Intelligence is not everything. An intelligent person can be a cold and cruel human being while a "stupid" person may be the sweetest and loveliest human being ever. I apply the same logic with all species of the living world, be it plant, animal or otherwise. If it were not for those "stupid" or "less valuable" animals then the whole ecological order would collapse and humans would realise just how important they were despite their "stupidity". They may not be intelligent the way humans are but they are very intelligent in their own way. It only takes to observe the animal kingdom to realise this. So, no, I do not believe that either are more valuable than the other. We all play our parts in this strange thing called Life;-)

Answer 2

Your example of the fire is thought-provoking but it doesn't support your premise.



You say,



"My point to this post is to give you another view on the matter. That view being that no animals life human or not is more valuable than another"



There's a great variety of humans - murderers, law-abiding citizens, heroes. There's a great variety of animals - dogs, mice, jellyfish, worms.



If you want to say simply that the life of a human being is not necessarily more important than an animal's life, you've made your point well.



Deciding between saving the life of a human, a total stranger, and a mouse, I'd say the stranger wins. You can say that I'm biased because I'm human. I would say to that - compare the human brain to the mouse brain. I wonder if, compared to humans, we'd call mice conscious. Also, when a mouse dies, do other mice go into mourning?

Answer 3

there is a scene in "the third man" where orson wells looks down on people say 100 ft below and says they look like ants - and he asks the person with him would he be bothered if one of those ants just dropped down dead



would you?



And would that person be more valuable to you than say a pet dog you have had for years?

If you had a choice of saving that person (a 100% anonymous person) by sacrificing a pet dog you have had for years would you do it? (I wouldnt)



It comes down to personal contact which generates empathy

without that a human has no more value to you than an animal



Think about this

WE (the human race) are contributing to the extinction of many species of beautiful animals

Once those animals are extinct they will never come back

Are the few of those animals that are left less valuable than a human life when there are billions of other humans on the planet?

Answer 4

God or eternal beings have created different kind of creatures with different senses. Animals have only five senses while human beings have six. This sixth sense is most important one blessed only to human beings. Todays developments have come only because of this sixth sense. Of course a human life is more valuable, even then it is just a kind. There is always a common fate which is always applicable to all creatures including human beings. That is, we are like other creatures except that we have an additional sense (sixth sense). This sense had changed only the living conditions of the human beings but not the fate. The fate is almost same to all creatures including human beings.

Answer 5

I think you're right. Many say humans' lives are more valuable because we are more advanced. By that logic, then your life is more valuable than every person who is less intelligent than you are. People are selfish. We make religions believing everything is centered around ourselves, and we care more about personal tastes than the well-being of our planet so much that we are destroying it. We have and are doing terrible things. At least there will always be a few good people among us.

Answer 6

If I let a killer die to save my dog then I too am a killer. Bottom line. You wouldn't have the same reaction if he was a dog serial killer.



I don't care about animal life. Bottom line. When you put them on a parity with human life I begin to actively disrespect animal life and your ability to understand what it means to be human. If we lose our respect for human life what are we? Less than an animal.



With all the death and torture human babies, children and women go through, to focus on the animals seems like a brain defect or a sadistic streak. Respecting our humanity as a thing apart is the only tool that can rescue us from savagery and indifference. If you dilute that with "fetuses rights" and "protect the poor pit bulls" while human children are still trafficked for the slave trade to gather the cocoa to make your Toll House Cookies then humanity is done for.



Stop buying chocolates and coffee that isn't Fair Trade*. And stop yapping about animal rights.

Answer 7

I prefer human and animal life valuable

Answer 8

In my opinion, valuation is partly provided and justified via some sense of proximity: we seem to have a preference for what is closer to us, perhaps because it is more ready a recipient for our empathy.



It doesn't make all human lives systematically preferable, but it does put a premium on the human attribute of a life.



If you want to find more elaborate arguments, my view here is based on a sentimentalist account of morality. Sandel is a person who sometimes echoes that kind of view today and Hume would be a classical example as well.

Answer 9

Yes..... it is true from our perspective..... for us humans, indeed a human life is more important than any animal or other lives..... of course, one can always argue about being truly 'valuable' in every case at all times.

Answer 10

It's a value judgement, rather like the rocks we call diamonds are regarded as more valuable than the rocks we call slate, despite the desirably of having a roof over your head. A hungry lion won't regard a human life as being equally valuable as their own.

Answer 11

yes, human lives are more valuable than animals. a human always takes precedence over an animal. THAT SAID.. there is still no reason for us to kill animals for food.. we dont need animal meat for protein, there's plenty of protein in dairy products, nuts, soy, grains, etc. the only reason to kill an animal is in self defense, or NECESSITY (when someone would otherwise starve)

Answer 12

An animal's life is as valuable to him as your life to you..and everyone's life is valuable in this world...

Answer 13

Yes you are right between humans and animals which one has more worth depends on who they are. Some animals have much more worth than some humans do. Many religions believe that human souls are on a higher level than animal souls. I do not believe that.

Answer 14

I fully agree with your opinion based on where we stand today.

But we could argue that we haven't reached the truly "Human" evolutionary level yet which would justify the claim of human being qualitatively higher species than other animals.

A truly "Human" is capable of rising above instinctive reactions, hormonal behavior, taking its development into its own hands proactively, purposefully seeking the meaning of life.

Answer 15

Well you are crazy but being human I value your life over an animals. That ticks you off, further proof you are a loon walking around in public.

Answer 16

IN GENERAL, human life IS more valuable than any other species. As with everything else, there are exceptions and extenuating circumstances that may affect the rule.

Answer 17

We think our lives are more valuable. And because we are the strongest, most dominant species on earth, it becomes truth. We even see that division within humanity. The upper class has the power, so their opinions become truth. It sucks, but such is life.

Answer 18

Hi

Answer 19

Correct

Answer 20

All life is precious.

Humans are highly advanced creation as per Almighty Creator's design.

Humans are designed to be children of the Almighty Creator, and have been blessed with qualities to love and be loved and co-creator's gift.

Answer 21

By our value standards, yes. Valuability is relative.

Answer 22

Probably yes, but it also depends on the individual person, because if I had to choose whether to save a murderer, rapist or someone the likes of Hitler and the life of a sick puppy definitely would choose a puppy :-)

Answer 23

Human life has a potential for eternity, animals do not.

Answer 24

Value is a subjective judgement call. Every person judges for themselves what they value and what they don't value. What one values highly, another may deem worthless. What one values highly at some given moment in time, they may deem worthless at some other moment in time. Value doesn't exist outside of the mind. It is a mistake to believe that one's own values are, or should be, another's values.

Answer 25

I don't think an animal's life is more or less important than my own. They feel too.

Answer 26

We say that all humans have the right to life, because while many of us can think of criminals, dictators etc. we would like dead, we can't unanimously agree on this. So we settle for agreeing on the idea that all humans have the right to life.



This then raises the issue of animals having the right to life and four alternatives:



1) animals and humans have a right to life



2) animals have a right to life but humans don't



3) humans have a right to life but animals don't.



4) neither animals or humans have a right to life



2 is rarely argued by anyone, so I'll ignore it.



1 I reject on the grounds of utility. It doesn't work. You cannot live by this philosophy. In practice, nobody does. Even if you are a strict vegan, earthworms and other organisms die when a field is ploughed. Even a strict vegan feeding themselves entirely on zero till agriculture (hypothetically speaking, as such people are rare/non existent) is starving animals by using land to produce food solely for himself. Nature doesn't work on these principles, which is why people who think like this are mainly found in cities, deluding themselves that they are not having an impact on nature, even though their local environment has been covered in concrete for their benefit, and vast industries around the world destroy wildlife to provide them with the food and raw materials which they demand.



This leaves 3 and 4



IMO human rights are a game rule which humans have developed in order to benefit humans. Many animal species show altruism towards related members of their own species, and many have mutualistic associations with other species. In ecological terms, human rights benefit humans and our domestic animals, as well as other species, such as rats and cockroaches which live around us, and benefit from our activities.



Nature works on much larger scale, chaotic feedback systems. There are no rights in nature. The word "right" means a straight line. Related words include regulation, royal, ray etc. Rights are an attempt to regulate nature, but nature is chaotic.



As humans we value the lives of individuals related to us, and attempt to achieve cooperation between humans all over the world (who are actually surprisingly closely related). We value the lives of animals which help us, such as sheepdogs, and sometimes transfer our parental instincts onto animals we call pets. Domestication of dogs seems to have given a huge advantage to humans, as did the later domestication of goats, cows, sheep, pigs, chickens etc. These animals have benefited too. They are far more common and widespread than they would have been in the wild.



Likewise I would choose to raise sheep on mountain pasture, kill them and eat them, in preference to ploughing the mountain slopes to grow vegetable crops, as the latter option would ultimately degrade the entire ecosystem, erode the soil, make the area uninhabitable for humans, wild animals or sheep, and kill millions of soil organisms. The former option would be better for wildlife, better for us and (paradoxically) better for the sheep.







If you kill someone's pet goldfish, they may be able to prosecute you for cruelty, but it is unlikely that you will get prison time. Kill someone's truffle hunting pig or guide dog and you will pay hefty compensation at least. These animals have financial value.



We can't totally reshape nature according to our own designs. Certain wild animals such as earthworms, salmon, bees and whales have proved to be extremely important for the functioning of ecosystems. Earthworms make soil, bees pollinate flowering plants and salmon and whales play important roles moving phosphate around from deep sea waters to freshwater.



These species are in practical terms more valuable than humans, and if they are endangered, each individuals life is worth more.



Granting all humans equal rights is a political move and generally a good one, but it is an artificial one. Attempting to extend this man made idea to the whole of nature achieves nothing good whatsoever.



As a rule, if a pit bull attacks a serial paedophile we are supposed to kill the pit bull. I wouldn't mind one less pit bull in the world, and we could put the paedophile on trial afterwards. If I somehow had to choose between the life of an endangered whale and the life of a serial paedophile, I personally would save the whale and kill the paedophile, whatever the law said.

Answer 27

Philosophically speaking, Yes. You are right.