The Importance Of Human Value And Equality

In the article,”Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?”, author Ed Yong implies that different types of primates such as apes should be treated more like human beings. He starts by stating a claim the there is some type of schism between different types of scientists and the world. Yong also explains the the Swiss law and how it protects the “dignity” of organisms. He also states that the apes are basically in “battle” Yong then starts to talk about what measures the GAP tries to take in order to give the apes some type of rights. He also explains the different measures that other countries have taken to help the apes within their country, and then he makes another claim in which

Mark Twain theorizes that man is in fact the so called “lower animal” and has descended from a single atom to insect to animal from a long line of innocence. The lowest stage would be reached and would become known as the human being. Twain counter argues the popular theory of Darwinism which could be considered controversial. However, he conducted experiments using the scientific method to provide evidence to his claim: the principle of human morality, as disputed in “The Damned Human Race”, has seemingly not evolved to the same extent of the morals of what he believes to be the “higher animals”. Moral sense as defined by Twain is the quality that enables wrong doing. Without this this “sense” man would not be capable of doing wrong.

In “Speciesism and Moral Status”, Peter Singers argument is that when it comes to the value of life, we should not discriminate in regards to species, and cognitive ability should play some role in moral status. In comparison to humans with “profound mental disabilities” (Singer 569), the use of the gorilla Koko’s higher IQ score, not needing constant supervision, or border collies being able to provide useful work to society, serves as a strong logos appeal regarding the relationship between cognitive ability and moral status. Singer is effectively able to support his claims by continuously referencing respected philosophers and individuals such as Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, and even Pope John Paul II. Validity and integrity are very much solidified in Singers article with the use of counter arguments as well as alternate views to his own arguments. The structure and information Singer provides is clear and organized, and does not leave his audience confused due to the strong use of factual, relevant support of his argument.

The idea that all humans are born equal has been something that has been almost installed in our minds. However, in the eyes of Peter Singer, we as humans are constantly violating our own moral code in the way we treat animals. Singer refers to this as speciesism and compares our treatment of animals to the same way sexists and racists treat those who they deem inferior. He also argues that the grounds on which they base their prejudice on are equally fragile. He illustrates this by comparing speciesists to racists. He recalls, “The racists violates the principle of equality by giving greater weight to the interests of his own race…similarly the speciesist allows the interests of his own species to override the greater interests of members of another species” (53.) He initiates this argument by explaining how our willingness to declare all humans as equal when the opposite is fundamentally true. Singer writes, “Like it or not, we must face the fact that humans come in different shapes and sizes; they come with differing moral capacities, differing intellect…if the demand for equality was based on the actual equality of all human beings, we would have to stop demanding equality” (51). Singer seeks to establish that our push for equality ends once the being in question is no longer human. Once he establishes this, he can quickly draw parallels between our unequal treatment of animals and humans. He evolves what initially begins as a far-fetched claim to a nuanced and

“Of Primates and Personhood” is an op-ed piece written by Ed Yong. In Young’s op-ed piece he talks about the Great Ape Project (GAP) happening in Spain and a Swiss law that wants to protect the dignity of the original organism, and questioning if primates should have a set of basic rights. On his op-ed, Yong provided good information on the Great Ape Project and talks about what is happening with the Swiss law. The GAP wants to set a law demanding that all apes should have legal and moral rights. This law will protect all apes from experiments and they will have a better living conditions.

In human history, several oppressed human groups have campaigned for equality, demanding for an expansion on the moral view of life, and to be treated fairly and have consideration. This means that when an issue concerns this group, their voices are heard, and treated with value. This equality should not be determined by that group’s collective intelligence level, the colour of their skin, or the physical stren¬¬gth of their bodies. Peter Singer brings up a similar idea in his essay: “All Animals Are Equal”, that non-human animals should have equal consideration with humans when an issue concerns them (Singer, quoted in Williston, p. 29-36). Going into a specific set of non-human animals known as primates, I argue that primates should have

What is the differentiation between equality and sameness? How does one’s identity effect these two notions? In Bradbury’s and Vonnegut’s fictitious stories, “The Pedestrian”, “Fahrenheit 451”, and “Harrison Bergeron”, these concepts and their relationship is depicted to the reader in the form of dystopias. These dystopias may not exist, but these science fictional societies certainly could be made to exist. These stories contain elements that anyone can relate to, and like all science fiction, accommodate real life factors such as technology, life, and government. Bradbury’s and Vonnegut’s stories convey the message that humanity needs to acknowledge its own need for individuality and be aware of

The article makes an apt comparison, finding that, “Overall, humans and chimpanzees showed comparable levels of violent death from aggression between groups.” At the point when humans—the pinnacle of evolution, the apex predator, the perfect machine—can objectively be compared to chimpanzees, an arguably lesser evolved animal, shows that we have no right to call ourselves evolved. Biologically we may be superior, but morally and emotionally, we have a long way to go. The evolution of murder as an effective means to a desired end, what the article calls a “by-product” of competition, is proof enough that we cannot call ourselves evolved. If we can produce such an atrocity simply as a by-product, humans cannot claim to function any different than wild animals. Evolution entails ascension, not only biologically, but also mentally, emotionally, and, most importantly, morally. The moral evolution that humanity has yet to achieve will provide the stepping stones towards substantial

Roet continues to explore the nature of our close relatives, the monkeys, gorillas and apes. This is done throughout her series of artworks consist of, three dimensional pieces, drawings on paper and photography artworks. ‘When I laugh, He laughs with me.’ advocates the close controversial connection between primates and humans. Roet explores the biological, cultural and visual parallels between humans and apes comprising the ‘physicality’ of romance. Using the sources of major international zoos and field studies of apes, Roet challenges the biological theories of humans evolving during the course of life and explores the bond between other primates.

I am informing you that I was quite enthralled with your article ‘The murder of Johnny’. I have always been enticed on the nature amongst Humans and Apes. I’d like to mention how I commend your passionate verbalisation. However, since you have touched a delicate matter, it has also seemed to cause certain misconceptions.

The core values of equality and social justice in American society have changed significantly over the last decades. The once dignified country that upholds both its traditional core values are now eroding through the systemic unjust laws, which favors the affluent ones. In consequence, there is an uneven distribution of power and wealth in the United States, where some become extremely powerful and rich, while the others become miserably poor and vulnerable. This serious ramification can be seen in the widespread concerns among the Wall Street executives and the middle-lower class people. According to The Divide by Matt Taibbi and the documentary Inside Job, white-collar Wall Street offenders are more likely to get away with their crimes even though they perpetrate profitable felony such as corporate fraud, whilst the blue-collar offenders get

What does it mean to be human? Is it in a curve of a mother’s back, a single bead of sweat tracing the contours of her face as she hums to sooth her tiny child on her back? Is it the fires of a furnace, as a star-like metal is poured into a elongated mold? Is it in the halls of lecture halls, as she scribbles out the code to space travel to an audience of enthused students? There are so many ways to classify ‘humanity’, be it by the biological material, or the compassion of one to another, or simply by our ‘superior intellect.’ However, a fruit--a banana--shares more of our genetic information that nearly any other organism. Other animals have been proven to show compassion--elephants staying behind to help their

The typical belief in human dominance was shaken through Darwin’s idea of natural selection and evolution which posited that humans, just as all other species “descended from some one prototype” (484). The descendants of this one prototype evolved based on natural selection. Evolution led to the creation of all organisms, living and extinct, including humans. The theory of evolution challenged the ideas of human exceptionalism and anthropocentrism by including humans in the same category as all other organisms, organisms that we as humans feel superior to. In evolutionary theory, humans become simply another species that managed to survive the “struggle for existence” rather than a master of nature created in the image of

A clear comparison of the prejudice between speciesism and racism is presented through contemporary American philosopher Carl Cohen. Cohen is one academic who calls himself a proud speciesist. Cohen has a somewhat Darwinian approach to speciesism, arguing that every species on the planet is struggling and fighting to claw their way to the top, that this is how it should be and this is how it is. Each species should only be concerned about looking after itself, and due to humans currently being at the top, this shows we are the strongest of the species and can do whatever we please with those below us. This argument from Cohen is the exact one which slave owners used to rationalise and justify the domination over indigenous people and Africans. Cohens given defence of speciesism directly links and compares with the prejudice of racism from the slave trade, a prejudice all are disgusted with, and so presents how the prejudice of speciesism is definitely comparable to racism.

Through analysing science fictions texts, it is clear that they emphasise the past and present issues of humanity by exaggerating their subsequent consequences in the future. 0.4 by Mike Lancester is a science fiction text which evidently represents the discrimination inflicted upon the ‘inferior’ races by the more ‘superior’ races. As this aspect of discrimination has occurred in the past, such as the racism faced by Aboriginal people, Lancester gives us an insight into the past of humanity. Furthermore, by exploring the possibility of social hierarchy in the near future due to genetic enhancements, 0.4 provides an insight into Lancester’s notion of the future of humanity.