A biologist would only take umbrage rhetorically, which is fine, but they'll never categorize a rock, a flower, or a human as 'a horse' so in reality it's not a

A biologist would only take umbrage rhetorically, which is fine, but they'll never categorize a rock, a flower, or a human as 'a horse' so in reality it's not a problem. While 'value' is surely in the eye of the beholder ... whether or not something fits into the category is not as subjective. And frankly, the 'big question' is 'who is the beholder' - which is something that materialism is struggling to tell us.