Mostly everyone agreed that animals have feelings or are at least cognitive beings:
• Russell: “Granted, dogs will never be able to comprehend love as humans do, but this does not mean that it isn’t derived from the same origin. So, if love is an adaptation, then wouldn’t it be possible for all animals to love?”
• Dana: “Of course animals can feel! Emotions are, at their very core, chemical responses triggered by varying stimuli.”
• David: “But there are different ways of ‘thinking’… Not all humans think in the same way. So I can’t see why they same wouldn’t hold true between humans and animals.”
We discriminate animals because they don’t look, think, or speak like us:
• Lydia: “Simply because they don't look like us, can't speak like us, can't drive a car or design computers, we tend to see animals as base creatures below us.”
• David: “People so often justify our superiority over animals and our mistreatment of them by giving the excuse that we are capable of reason and higher intelligent thought.”
• Ben: “As humans, we tend to perceive our beings as the more intellectual, and I think we do so for a couple of reasons. One specifically is our ability to adapt and adopt.”
• Jennifer: “We try to justify our actions by saying we’re more intelligent, animals eat each other too, and that we’re doing what is more economical.”
• Saumya: “Intelligence is relative. In all honesty, I wonder if the animal who knows what it takes to live efficiently is a hell of a lot smarter than the human who dabbles in indulgences that aren't needed for survival. Sometimes, it seems like as a species we've made life a lot harder for ourselves.”
• Jenny: “But because we label ourselves as “intelligent” and above all other kingdoms of life, isn’t it within us to use our intelligence to further the advancement of our methods of consumption? Shouldn’t we use our technology and resources to find other ways to obtain our food, ways that do not involve the killing of an innocent animal”
All seem to agree that the sympathetic imagination is necessary to understand the plight of these animals, and perhaps allow a solution to our treatment of them. However, how can we accomplish this if we can’t even seem to do this for humans?
• Mary: “We need to respect each other in order to successfully co-habitat on this earth. Without balance, destruction will arise.”
• Dana: “I ask that you extend your sympathetic imagination anyway. Take a moment to understand what pain is and how it feels to a nonhuman animal.”
“Humans are terrified of the realization that “animals are like us in some essential way”
Obviously, we all touched on the topic of respecting nature, but do you think it is within the capacity of humans, who are always reaching higher and wanting more, to actually act on this?
• Brian: “I find that the greatest chasm in my mind to cross over is the bridge of the sympathetic imagination. I find it hard enough to extend to other humans.”
• Lydia: “We don't fight for survival, we fight for our indulgence, our materialism, and want for luxury.”
Does the “elitism” of human beings extend to vegetarians or animal rights activists when claiming morally superior positions?
• Brian: Further, Coetzee’s novel poses the question whether “vegetarians are really trying to save animals, or only trying to put themselves in a morally superior position to other humans.”[12]
• Ben: “I am tired of sitting in discussion being judged because of the things I believe. I find it very often that someone brings up a topic and is trumped because another disagrees, or rolls eyes at the comment.”
Do you ever think this issue of the role animals play in our lives could be resolved? Because eventually you’re stepping into things like, are we exploiting animals when we keep them as pets, or are we exploiting them when we use them in films.
• Mary: “The first and most practical way to ending animal cruelty is by eliminating our own wasteful tendencies. If everyone would actually eat the food they have received before they get more, the amount of food demanded would dramatically decrease. Thus, the amount of animals killed for our food would reduced.”
• Samantha: “Animal killing, on the other hand, is something that happens in that natural order of the animal kingdom. Humans are not the only animals that kill other living animals.”
• Lydia: “Everyone believes in contrasting moral views; it's too difficult to come to a compromise, and I don't think we'll ever be completely satisfied with not only the subject of animal abuse, but abortion, gay rights, prostitution, etc. I think we'll always have this constant battle between, persay, the carnivores and the vegetarians.”
Is it possible for us to give up our money and time to provide better conditions for these animals? (Prop 2 passed)
• Doesn’t it seem, though, that in the grand scheme of things, animal rights always figures at the very bottom?
• Russell: “The cheapest way to kill an animal is certainly not the most humane, but we rarely encounter businesses that are willing to spend extra money.”
•Austyn: "The word is a complex machine of give and take, and we’re the only species who constantly takes but never gives. If we’re such intelligent beings, capable of such sophisticated things then why haven’t we figured out a way to give back to the hand that has feed our existence for millions of years?"
Brian brought up an interesting point: that most animal rights activists are also pro-life. However, many of the vegetarians I know are pro-choice. To be discussed in class…
A question that seems to be prevalent in all of our discussion boards: Are you a vegetarian for the animal or for you?
• Kajal: “It is how we are raised. It is a question of our personal philosophy.”
Discuss in class:
Ben discusses the “elitism” of the superior morals of animal rights activists
Andrew discusses the idea of those who farm their animals and care for them in ways that large factory farms do not.
No comments:
Post a Comment