5 ms·
> but more importantly start seeing animals as other beings with souls Let's stipulate that non-human animals have a "soul," whatever you believe a soul to be.
by topspin 8y ago
> but more importantly start seeing animals as other beings with souls
Let's stipulate that non-human animals have a "soul," whatever you believe a soul to be.
How to you judge the soul of, say, a raccoon; a creature than has been called the psychopath of the animal world? A raccoon is never happier than when it's slaughtering a nest full of cute, helpless babies. Red-tailed hawks are such a menace to other species that crows make it their business to hound these magnificent raptors incessantly, injuring and killing when possible.
Is there a place for these creatures in your moral paradigm? What solution do you offer for the utterly ubiquitous violence that has been occurring among all these "souls" for hundreds of millions of years?
We manage deer populations, factoring in hunting and other predation, disease, losses to automobiles, etc., and we thus have stable populations of deer. There is no rational reason to indulge some great sadness when a car hits a deer.
- mike00632 8y agoRaccoons don't have the capacity for moral judgement but humans do. It doesn't make sense to think of a raccoon's actions as a part of a moral framework but it does for humans. In fact, we already do. What vegans/vegetarians are doing is extending that logic to be more consistent in our diet.
- nradov 8y agoProve to us that raccoons have no capacity for moral judgment. Those clear dividing lines between humans and other animals are in reality not supported by much evidence.
- mike00632 8y ago"Prove to us that raccoons have no capacity for moral judgment." Is that something I really need to prove? My argument is that we SHOULD make moral judgement about human behavior regardless of what raccoons do. I agree that there is not much difference between humans and others animals if we choose to examine it.
- Semirhage 8y agoAnytime you make a significant claim, especially a disputed one that is central to your thesis, it is helpful to at least attempt to back it up. Most people won’t call you on not doing it or talk about burden of proof, they’ll just dismiss your claim with the same lack of effort you put into making it.
- Ensorceled 8y agoThe premise under discussion is that they have a soul, so it's a big leap to say that they have a soul but no capacity for moral judgment. I also reject the premise that an act may be evil if propagated by a human but ok if done by a being without moral judgment.
- mike00632 8y agoI don't believe anyone has a soul yet I still make moral judgments about our actions. I don't think that having a soul is what gives us morality.