6 ms·

I was just thinking today that if we are allowed to cage animals who have the mental development of a 6 year old, why can't we justify caging people who have th

I was just thinking today that if we are allowed to cage animals who have the mental development of a 6 year old, why can't we justify caging people who have the mental capacity of a 6 year old.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Kenji 11y ago
Oh it's all speciesism. A human has more inherent worth in the common human morals. It makes zero sense from a logical point of view, probably an evolutionary remnant.
- reagency 11y ago
  One day I might have a mentally disabled child. I will have an orangutan as a genetic heir or friend. That logically explains the common sense ethics.
- reagency 11y ago
  One day I might have a mentally disabled child. I will have an orangutan as a genetic heir or friend. That logically explains the common sense ethics.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Speciesism is ridiculous concept. Humans are inherently worth more than other animals. This does not mean that we should go out of way to maltreat animals, but when the choice is a human life verses an animal’s life then the human's should always come first. In regards orangutans we can certainly do a better job of ensuring both can exist.
  - rawTruthHurts 11y ago
    > inherently worth more According to what scale?
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      Ask yourself how many animals you would kill to save you own child. If the answer is a number without limit then there is no morality in letting someone else child die to save some animal.
      - rawTruthHurts 11y ago
        Oh... so it's a scale set by you... :(
        danieltillett 11y ago
        No it a scale set by everyone who has thought about this issue for more than five minutes. Are you really telling me that you would let your own child die so some animal can live? If so you either have no children nor should you.
- mehwoot 11y ago
  It makes zero sense from a logical point of view No, it makes a lot of sense. Treating all species the same would make very little sense. Do bacteria have the same rights as lice which have the same rights as mice which have the same rights as dogs which have the same rights as whales? In reality, it is a scale. How much we care about an animal varies depending on how big it is, how intelligent it is, what it is capable of and how it interacts with our lives. To pretend every species is the same is just wilfully naive.
ars 11y ago
No animals have the mental development of a 6 year old. Even 2 year olds can talk and more importantly ask tons of questions, no animals can do that. > why can't we justify caging people who have the mental capacity of a 6 year old. They do that all the time in psychiatric hospitals. They are just a bit nicer about it these days.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

I was just thinking today that if we are allowed to cage animals who have the mental development of a 6 year old, why can't we justify caging people who have the mental capacity of a 6 year old.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

Kenji 11y ago

Oh it's all speciesism. A human has more inherent worth in the common human morals. It makes zero sense from a logical point of view, probably an evolutionary remnant.

reagency 11y ago
One day I might have a mentally disabled child. I will have an orangutan as a genetic heir or friend. That logically explains the common sense ethics.
reagency 11y ago
One day I might have a mentally disabled child. I will have an orangutan as a genetic heir or friend. That logically explains the common sense ethics.
danieltillett 11y ago
Speciesism is ridiculous concept. Humans are inherently worth more than other animals. This does not mean that we should go out of way to maltreat animals, but when the choice is a human life verses an animal’s life then the human's should always come first. In regards orangutans we can certainly do a better job of ensuring both can exist.
- rawTruthHurts 11y ago
  > inherently worth more According to what scale?
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    Ask yourself how many animals you would kill to save you own child. If the answer is a number without limit then there is no morality in letting someone else child die to save some animal.
    - rawTruthHurts 11y ago
      Oh... so it's a scale set by you... :(
      - danieltillett 11y ago
        No it a scale set by everyone who has thought about this issue for more than five minutes. Are you really telling me that you would let your own child die so some animal can live? If so you either have no children nor should you.
mehwoot 11y ago
It makes zero sense from a logical point of view No, it makes a lot of sense. Treating all species the same would make very little sense. Do bacteria have the same rights as lice which have the same rights as mice which have the same rights as dogs which have the same rights as whales? In reality, it is a scale. How much we care about an animal varies depending on how big it is, how intelligent it is, what it is capable of and how it interacts with our lives. To pretend every species is the same is just wilfully naive.

ars 11y ago

No animals have the mental development of a 6 year old. Even 2 year olds can talk and more importantly ask tons of questions, no animals can do that. > why can't we justify caging people who have the mental capacity of a 6 year old. They do that all the time in psychiatric hospitals. They are just a bit nicer about it these days.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]