What makes a human life more important than a plant or an animal life?

V-Tog wrote: Nature

When my conscience tells me that eating animals is wrong, I remind myself that we are designed and intended to do so.

so, who ends up winning?

kemo wrote: so, who ends up winning?

The carnivorous part of me

Joe wrote: We are not at the top of he food chain. i could name a dozen animals that would eat you with gusto. But we don't have any natural predators anymore, due to scientific breakthroughs along history.

I don't think a human life is "more important" than the life of every other living thing. At least if i try to be objective.

The "worth" of things is something we humans made up. It's in fact immessurable. Why most of the people think animals are worth less than humans, is simply because of their individual feelings towards one or the other. I have a cat, who is 16 years old, and has been with me all my life. I hold it very dearly, and her worth to me is probably much higher than that of people i don't know / i don't know anything about.
It's all just a matter of the point of view.

A disease can kill an entire species...does that then make bacteria the top of the food chain?

What makes human life more important than plant and animal life? Who here believes this is true? I don't. Now if you are asking if I value human life more then animals and plants on a priority survival basis then yes.

SeanChing wrote: This is just my opinion, and isn't any type of official reason.

I think that this is the case because human beings have developed language and empathy, which have allowed human societies to become more powerful than any animal group could become. More specifically, we have developed language, which can prevent individual/small violence, and we've developed empathy, which is both a helpful and noble asset to the human race. While animals have shown signs of empathy, my understanding is that they have shown it inconsistently and usually only for primitive reasons, such as the continuing of their species. (As opposed to human beings who display empathy for more transcended reasons.) And of course, animals have never developed real language - beyond a few primitive dances and calls.

With superior development and skills, it's no wonder human culture has developed in a way where humans view themselves as more important than plants and animals.



Also, you only get to talk with human beings about this issue (I assume) so you're not going to hear someone advocating for plant or animal dominance, since what would be the use for subordinating your own human race to another, indifferent species?

Not to pick on you, Sean I just like to play devils advocate sometimes.

But, about language. Many animals have language, just because we're too stupid to crack their code doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it's poorly evolved. Also, human beings rarely (according to the news) show empathy. We're just as greedy, mean, and animalistic as any animal.

Have you heard about the story of the lioness adopting an orphaned antelope? Or the story of the dog who mourned for his lost companion? Or Hachi? Or the dolphins who have saved a humans life? There are tons of example of animals acting kindly towards each other. Or empathizing like the rats who free each other from cages.

There was a time when we use to think animals couldn't feel pain and that goldfish had 3 second memories. Really, as a species, we know very little about the creatures who share this world with us.

Wendaline wrote:
Not to pick on you, Sean I just like to play devils advocate sometimes.

But, about language. Many animals have language, just because we're too stupid to crack their code doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it's poorly evolved. Also, human beings rarely (according to the news) show empathy. We're just as greedy, mean, and animalistic as any animal.

I disagree. If we're just as "greedy, mean, and animalistic as any animal", why have we developed medicine, transportation, care homes, and welfare? Such things would be inefficient and truly unecessary in a purely survivalist world - how animals view things. Have animals ever made medicine to heal the weak, or have they organized shelter and food supplies to the needy? No. Because they can't communicate or empathize to the level of superior human empathy and communication.

Have you heard about the story of the lioness adopting an orphaned antelope? Or the story of the dog who mourned for his lost companion? Or Hachi? Or the dolphins who have saved a humans life? There are tons of example of animals acting kindly towards each other. Or empathizing like the rats who free each other from cages.

I have heard about this, and I've never said that animals don't do these types of things ever. They do....just inconsistently. Usually, too, you'll find that animals will do these things purely for survival or sex....not for advanced feelings of empathy that humans have.

There was a time when we use to think animals couldn't feel pain and that goldfish had 3 second memories. Really, as a species, we know very little about the creatures who share this world with us.

Right you are! Animals are amazing - don't get me wrong. But are they "lesser creatures" than human beings. They prove that to themselves.

Ah, medicine...if it truly was for benevolent reasons then why charge so much money for them?...my mom's heart meds cost a small fortune....why not make them free?....I worked in a nursing home...it wasn't empathy or compassion that ran it or kept it in business (it may have been a factor for some of the staff, but not all)...many of humanity's greatest creations began with benevolence but became about financial gain or power....plants and animals are not greater nor lesser than humans...if you take out any of them from the equation, then balance is lost...

Rickie The Grey wrote: What makes human life more important than plant and animal life? Who here believes this is true? I don't. Now if you are asking if I value human life more then animals and plants on a priority survival basis then yes.

You don't have to be in a survival situation to see that, really, all of you truly believe that human life is more important than plant and animal life. Just look at regular, healthy society.

If you truly believed that humans, animals, and plant life were on the same "level" of importance, then why not eat a human being? You don't have to be starving or in a survival situation. Just eat a human being. Oh, wait, you can't? Why not?

It is because you truly believe human life is more important than plant and animal life. You can't bear to equate a human body to that of an animal body or plant form. If you truly believed we are all equal, then substituting human instead of animal or plants for food wouldn't be an issue at all.


Now, you might say, "If you ate a human, you would go to jail! That's why you don't do it."
But you can go to jail for eating certain animals as well. If you ate your dog, cat, horse, fish, etc., you would be arrested for animal abuse/neglect (to say the least) - going to jail just as if you were to eat a human being.

I'm sure that, if necessary, people would most nearly always eat their cats, dogs, horses, fish, etc., before even considering to harm and eat a human being.


Main point: We all do think human life is more important than animal or plant life. We just might not understand it or admit it.

You have valid points from a certain perspective.....but there are still tribes that practice cannibalism....many animals do not practice cannibalism....

RyuJin wrote: Ah, medicine...if it truly was for benevolent reasons then why charge so much money for them?...my mom's heart meds cost a small fortune....why not make them free?....I worked in a nursing home...it wasn't empathy or compassion that ran it or kept it in business (it may have been a factor for some of the staff, but not all)...many of humanity's greatest creations began with benevolence but became about financial gain or power....plants and animals are not greater nor lesser than humans...if you take out any of them from the equation, then balance is lost...

Ryujin, that is actually delving into the nature of politics....which can get a lot more...heated

Well, if we really must go into this topic, I'll just explain my opinion on a basic level - nothing too partisan from me! :whistle:


First of all, I take it that you're not a doctor, Ryujin? A lot of my family members are doctors, so they've told me why prices for medication are so high. First, the costs for materials, labor, and knowledge (further degrees and education) needed to make medicine costed the doctors a lot of money to put in. So it's only fair that, since they put in a lot of money and time to get their education/degrees, materials, labor, and reputation, that they get a lot out of it, right? A big investment for a big return.

Also, a lot of the high prices for medication also has a lot to do with insurance companies and health care policies. Mostly, in recent American history, insurance companies have become so large, strict, and un-common sensical that they have tried to improve the quality towards patients at the expense of doctors.

People think that doctors are rich and greedy, for charging a lot for meds. But realize that, in combination with the costs to prepare and manage medicine, as well as the pressures from insurance companies and health care policies, being a doctor hasn't been that profitable of a job anymore. In fact, my folks have told me to pursue business instead of medical!

And if doctors get to the point where their jobs aren't worth the effort, then it's no medicine for anyone. So the little fish die with the big fish. "Rich" people and "poorer" people are, as this conversation has already brought up, "interconnected". So you can't really "rob the rich to pay the poor", because, eventually, you'll run out of other peoples' monies.