FA+
Shop
Humans vs. animals
15 years ago
This is something I've been thinking about recently.
We humans do far more damage to our own kind than the animals do to theirs.
My first thought is that man has some sort of intrinsic morality that is above animals. After all, animals eat their own children sometimes. That's something a human would never do, right? But when you look at it, I would say humans are even worse- most of the time we don't have a physical need to kill our own children. Most people seem have abortions just because it doesn't fit their lifestyle.
Some animals hunt and kill, but again, only to live. Mankind will kill for much smaller and selfish reasons. Some have been killed just because they've insulted someone, some have been killed just to display power, and to this day even children will be sacrificed to appease pagan gods and goddesses.
But not only do humans slaughter other humans without reason, but humans are the only creatures alive that will cause pain for their own pleasure. You never see a lion getting some perverse thrill out of slowly cutting through the body of a pinned-down antelope, he chokes the thing and gets it over with. But man has committed all kinds of unspeakable atrocities to his fellow man, and he has even enjoyed it. You would be naive to think that torture does not go on today, a quick search on modern torture will revel to you that it is still a common practice.
But the thing that most stands out to me is that no animals has ever committed genocide against their fellow animal, not even another species of animal. But this we do to our own species! What happened at the holocaust was humans killing other humans BY THE MILLIONS because they were deemed to be worthless.
When you go on walks at night, you do not fear that a lion or a stray dog will hurt you. We do not go out and fear animals- we fear other MEN. Chelsea King was not raped and murdered by a bear, but by her fellow human.
And I am convinced that we all share in this human-wide evil. Obviously not all of us are Hitler, but we are all made out of the same stuff he was. Surely, the potential is there. Many of us will try to justify ourselves, but I'm convinced that all of us are in some way contaminated by evil.
If you take a standard of good it's clear that none of us add up. Like the Ten Commandments; you shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not lie, you shall not covet, etc.
Who among us has not lied to protect his pride or position? Who hasn't stolen something, as least as a child? Who hasn't been jealous over what his neighbor has? Jesus said that if you even look at another person with sexual desire, you've committed adultery in your heart. Have you ever had hateful or racist thoughts against someone? That's murder of the heart.
In civil law, a good judge must punish crime. If he turns a blind eye to injustice, then he is corrupt and he himself should be punished. If God is good and sees the crimes of man, surely He will have justice. This is the teaching of the Bible— that God will "by no means clear the guilty." He "will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether it is good or whether it is evil," "God is angry with the wicked every day."
But even worse than the crimes committed against our fellow man are the crimes committed against God. God's laws says in commandments 1, 2, and 3: You shall have no other gods before Me, You shall not make for yourself a graven image, You shall not take God's name in vain.
He gave us this world to live in, and all the good food we have eaten, and all our friends that we love. It is only right to honor Him!
But we never do! Not only do we not honor Him, but we have all sinned many times. And therefore we have stored up God's wrath, which will be revealed on Judgment Day. The proof that we have sinned will be our death, and after death we must face God in judgment. Think of it— if He has seen our every thought, word, and deed, and if He is going to bring all our sins out as evidence of our guilt on the Day of Judgment, we will all be found to be guilty. Our conscience has shown us right from wrong; we will be without excuse. God will give us justice, and Hell will be the place of our eternal punishment. "For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known."
It would be right if God sent everyone to Hell.
If you think I'm wrong, and that you're a good person, then you can just click "back" on your browser because you won't care about what I'm going to say next.
There is no reason to fear Hell, and there is a reason that people call God a loving God.
Our God made us, and He didn't want to lose us to evil. So 2,000 years ago, God came down to earth as a man and gave up His sinless life for ours. So that you wouldn't have to go to Hell, God sent his only Son, Jesus, to die on the cross -- suffering the punishment that justice demands. Then He rose from the grave, forever defeating death!
We broke the law of God and we deserve to be punished, but Jesus paid our fine in His life's blood. This fact means God can legally dismiss your case. He can commute your death sentence and let you live.
The Bible tells us, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
If you will repent of your sins and put your trust in Jesus, God says he will forgive all your sins and grant you the gift of everlasting life.
We humans do far more damage to our own kind than the animals do to theirs.
My first thought is that man has some sort of intrinsic morality that is above animals. After all, animals eat their own children sometimes. That's something a human would never do, right? But when you look at it, I would say humans are even worse- most of the time we don't have a physical need to kill our own children. Most people seem have abortions just because it doesn't fit their lifestyle.
Some animals hunt and kill, but again, only to live. Mankind will kill for much smaller and selfish reasons. Some have been killed just because they've insulted someone, some have been killed just to display power, and to this day even children will be sacrificed to appease pagan gods and goddesses.
But not only do humans slaughter other humans without reason, but humans are the only creatures alive that will cause pain for their own pleasure. You never see a lion getting some perverse thrill out of slowly cutting through the body of a pinned-down antelope, he chokes the thing and gets it over with. But man has committed all kinds of unspeakable atrocities to his fellow man, and he has even enjoyed it. You would be naive to think that torture does not go on today, a quick search on modern torture will revel to you that it is still a common practice.
But the thing that most stands out to me is that no animals has ever committed genocide against their fellow animal, not even another species of animal. But this we do to our own species! What happened at the holocaust was humans killing other humans BY THE MILLIONS because they were deemed to be worthless.
When you go on walks at night, you do not fear that a lion or a stray dog will hurt you. We do not go out and fear animals- we fear other MEN. Chelsea King was not raped and murdered by a bear, but by her fellow human.
And I am convinced that we all share in this human-wide evil. Obviously not all of us are Hitler, but we are all made out of the same stuff he was. Surely, the potential is there. Many of us will try to justify ourselves, but I'm convinced that all of us are in some way contaminated by evil.
If you take a standard of good it's clear that none of us add up. Like the Ten Commandments; you shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not lie, you shall not covet, etc.
Who among us has not lied to protect his pride or position? Who hasn't stolen something, as least as a child? Who hasn't been jealous over what his neighbor has? Jesus said that if you even look at another person with sexual desire, you've committed adultery in your heart. Have you ever had hateful or racist thoughts against someone? That's murder of the heart.
In civil law, a good judge must punish crime. If he turns a blind eye to injustice, then he is corrupt and he himself should be punished. If God is good and sees the crimes of man, surely He will have justice. This is the teaching of the Bible— that God will "by no means clear the guilty." He "will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether it is good or whether it is evil," "God is angry with the wicked every day."
But even worse than the crimes committed against our fellow man are the crimes committed against God. God's laws says in commandments 1, 2, and 3: You shall have no other gods before Me, You shall not make for yourself a graven image, You shall not take God's name in vain.
He gave us this world to live in, and all the good food we have eaten, and all our friends that we love. It is only right to honor Him!
But we never do! Not only do we not honor Him, but we have all sinned many times. And therefore we have stored up God's wrath, which will be revealed on Judgment Day. The proof that we have sinned will be our death, and after death we must face God in judgment. Think of it— if He has seen our every thought, word, and deed, and if He is going to bring all our sins out as evidence of our guilt on the Day of Judgment, we will all be found to be guilty. Our conscience has shown us right from wrong; we will be without excuse. God will give us justice, and Hell will be the place of our eternal punishment. "For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known."
It would be right if God sent everyone to Hell.
If you think I'm wrong, and that you're a good person, then you can just click "back" on your browser because you won't care about what I'm going to say next.
There is no reason to fear Hell, and there is a reason that people call God a loving God.
Our God made us, and He didn't want to lose us to evil. So 2,000 years ago, God came down to earth as a man and gave up His sinless life for ours. So that you wouldn't have to go to Hell, God sent his only Son, Jesus, to die on the cross -- suffering the punishment that justice demands. Then He rose from the grave, forever defeating death!
We broke the law of God and we deserve to be punished, but Jesus paid our fine in His life's blood. This fact means God can legally dismiss your case. He can commute your death sentence and let you live.
The Bible tells us, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
If you will repent of your sins and put your trust in Jesus, God says he will forgive all your sins and grant you the gift of everlasting life.
The idea that humans are worse than animals fails to take into account the effects of scale. Humans on a macro level do not behave any differently than any other predator. A predator that enters another's territory is likely to be killed, and if a pack decides to move encroach on and conquer a territory they will engage in genocide if given the chance. Animals will kill and even torture for sport eg. dolphins and chimpanzees. They will also consume and destroy everything if not held in check by predation and disease. There is no nobility among animals and we as humans need to strive for something better than giving into and worshiping our animalistic motivations.
I also took that good person test and I have to take issue with it. Good is not defined by adhering to arbitrary rules. I will lie to make someone's life better, I will take if doesn't hurt or will help, I will blaspheme because there is no reason to believe in gods and I will desire because I seek to achieve happiness for myself and others. Even anger can be a force for good, if I am motivated by anger to help someone or to accomplish good then it cannot be considered evil.
A black and white view of the world does not apply because the world is not divided in that way.
You bring up some interesting points, but I'm curious about where you're coming from. In your view, what is the definition of 'goodness' or 'morality'? I mean, why should anyone strive to be better than animals? Why shouldn't people just do whatever they want even if it hurts other people?
The answer to your question is two fold.
One is a fairly objective point: Humans tend to be more empathic than animals. This makes us better wired to doing things that don't involve hurting others.
The other reason is more subjective: Humans have, as a result of their empathy, formed concepts like morality, and through that our societies become insulated from collapsing totally on themselves from self-predation. By realizing things like "if someone did this to me, it would hurt me, so I won't do it to him" we have stopped ourselves from pillaging each other for everything.
However, Empathy, like any natural or man-made 'tool' can be used to harm or help. I'm quite certain people have used empathy before to toy with their victims to great emotional turmoil. It should also be noted that some humans have shown absolutely no regard for empathic emotions, or at the least, overlook them from time to time.
Not meaning to butt in, again. I probably will remove myself from this conversation forthwith. But, you're an interesting fellow, SeaBunny, and I felt inclined to comment. If you ever want to have a chat, feel free to impart yourself upon me. I'd be honored to share the time with you.
But to continue the conversation, here's my two cents:
If you are right and the idea of morality and goodness is just something we evolved and developed ourselves, how do we know that it is really "good" at all? Maybe we are constantly evolving towards goodness. But if that is the case, than at this point we could be incomplete. So maybe I'm the next step in evolution if I believe murder is moral since it cuts out my competition.
My point is, if empathy and morality just came about naturally, then it isn't the same always. It will evolve and change like everything else. What's good today could be bad tomorrow. And if that is the case, why follow something that changes so arbitrarily? Especially if it would be inconvenient to our own personal wellbeing.
If we all just evolved our morality, why does it matter what's right or wrong? It's not "really" right or wrong, it's just our instincts. And our instincts can be incorrect. We don't follow all our evolved instincts, and some things can be left over from evolution. So why follow morality?
Questions like these are part of what leads me to believe that in order for morality to apply at all, it has to be a standard outside ourselves beyond what evolution and our human nature could create.
However, you're right, I think humanities' sense of morality constantly goes through change. I don't know if the change is arbitrary, but people have constantly disagreed on what is wrong and right. I tend to think that people will hold to certain moral principals based on how they have lived their own lives, and the things that have affected them personally. A person's own upbringing, and the society they live in however, tend to be the major two factors that affect this.
Now why do you think people happen to follow their own personal moral compasses the way they do? Well, you'd have to ask them I suppose.
As for looking for an outside standard, you'd have to ask someone else. I've never heard of a single logical explanation showing that one existed that wasn't flawed with self-defeating holes in it. I think humans TEND towards certain moral standards, but not a single one is held unanimously. As I said, it's based on how the individual wishes to act.
If a person is capable true empathy, is capable of genuine self improvement, has strong willpower, and expresses these through a successful and happy life then they can be seen as a good human. If however they merely go through the motions and attempt to act in a way that meets the approval of others or an external moral code then they aren't a good human, but are simply a good automaton. They could be replaced by a machine with no difference.
I personally feel we are obligated to be better than animals simply because we have the capacity to do so. There really is no argument for why human civilization can't be a paradise.
So, in your opinion, we are obliged to be better than animals because our human nature gives us the capacity to do so?
But if our human nature is just product of our evolution, why does it oblige us to to anything at all?
If “goodness” in human nature is a product of evolution, there is no reason to follow it. There are loads of things that are part of our instincts, but we don't follow all of them.
And you used the word “better”. But I would say, what makes one set of behavior truly better than another? If our nature is the result of our evolution, how do we know that “how we are now” is any “better”? Maybe these feelings of morality that we have are just a useless leftover from our previous evolutionary history.
Even your definition of the “good human”'s self-improvement, empathy, and willpower, how do you know that is truly good? Why is the human that exhibits those traits better than the violent one who doesn't want to change and hates everyone? They are both following their instincts to the best of their abilities.
You don't have to answer all of those questions for me, those are just the kinds of questions that lead me to believe that morality has to be a standard outside of human nature or human design.
If we didn't use our capacity then there is no purpose to having it. Given that it is present it would be a waste not to benefit from it.
If “goodness” in human nature is a product of evolution, there is no reason to follow it. There are loads of things that are part of our instincts, but we don't follow all of them.
Our instincts are not necessarily good. One of our most basic instincts is to "take what we want", you can see it in play in very young children. They see a toy another child is playing with and they will instinctively attempt to seize it, even if doing so harms the other child. This is done entirely because they cannot empathize with the other.
And you used the word “better”. But I would say, what makes one set of behavior truly better than another? If our nature is the result of our evolution, how do we know that “how we are now” is any “better”? Maybe these feelings of morality that we have are just a useless leftover from our previous evolutionary history.
Now you're asking the right questions. You can actually quantify what makes one behavior better than another. If your actions yield a result that directly or indirectly benefits you then the action can be seen as "better" than one that may only appear to benefit you while in reality greatly harming you. Take for example the instinct to take again. Perhaps you see a car you like, so you steal it. In that situation you now have an awesome new car, so you appear to have benefited. However you are now in a situation where the previous owner wants their car back, perhaps they will attempt to have you arrested or worse, do physical harm to you. In that case your behavior can not be seen as "better" because ultimately you have negatively impacted your life in a very meaningful way. Many such situations are not so obvious but the premise is similar.
Even your definition of the “good human”'s self-improvement, empathy, and willpower, how do you know that is truly good? Why is the human that exhibits those traits better than the violent one who doesn't want to change and hates everyone? They are both following their instincts to the best of their abilities.
Those attributes can be interpreted as good because they are tools that enable positive sum situations rather than the negative sum situations I've thus far given as examples. Instincts and learned behaviors are different things and a person isn't instinctively hateful or beneficent without environmental factors in play.
Morality may seem a nebulous, even supernatural, concept but it's actually very simple and can be understood on a rational and evolutionary level. If you try to interpret it through a written text you will discover "morals" that contradict one another or don't actually provide any real benefit. Some such morals can actually be dangerous if you don't filter them through the lens of your social and evolved morals.