Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee
It gets a bit weird for me though how humans basically just categorize different species essentially based on how cute they are and then in some instances seem to prioritize them above humans. It’s actually super weird when you think about it.
Shooting ducks and hunting deer? AOK! Grizzly bear shot? The horror, because look at how beautiful they are? Weird. Step on ants? Who cares! Rats? They’re gross! Pheasants? Shoot ‘em up!
|
You are right that humans in general make moral distinctions between animals on an arbitrary basis. The term for this is speciesism where you gauge an animals value based on morally irrelevant traits. Why is a dog more important than a pig because they have paws instead of hooves? Pigs are significantly more intelligent than dogs in fact. To me the rule of thumb whether we ought to have moral concern for a given animal is whether they possess sentience or not. Sentient creatures in my view should be given a baseline level of moral concern. Namely that we shouldn't exploit or kill them without reasonable justification. Stepping on an ant as a matter of course=unfortunate but not immoral. Intention is a huge factor when assessing a moral crime. There is a world of moral difference between accidentally running over a dog and intentionally swerving to hit a dog for instance. Shoving pigs into gas chambers so we can have a BLT when we could easily choose to eat something else=immoral.