From: Anna (i577b552a.versanet.de -184.108.40.206)
Subject: Re: What differences?
Date: February 16, 2006 at 2:58 pm PST
In Reply to: Re: What differences? posted by Lord Golbez on February 7, 2006 at 12:04 pm:
"Also, I find terms like "speciesist" ridiculous, and when push comes
to shove I do believe in hierarchy."
Speciesist is the analogue to racist, fascist, sexist and so on and
addresses the false dichtonomy between human animals and nonhuman
animals. So when push comes to shove, you believe in, e.g. the
hierarchy of discriminating against women and people of color? If not,
then you clearly _are_ a speciecist, since you reserve the assignation
of ethical rights to humans only. This would put on par with a sexist
who finds women's rights ridiculous, or a racist who finds the right of
people of color not to be enslaved ridiculous.
BTW, depending on your definition of harm, slavery of humans could very
well be done without harm. Say, you got a 100 Africans working on your
farm, don't pay them salary but provide food and health care and basic
housing, but restrict their movement. There wouldn't be any physical
harm, but if you're not suffering from racism or other ethical
handicaps it would be totally unacceptable.
Speciesism is just a word, what's relevant here is the concept behind
it. It means humans have no right to discriminate against animals just
because they are not member of our species. Just like men have no right
to discriminate against women just because they are not members of the
male gender. If you find the term speciesism ridiculous, then, as a
logical consequence, you would also have to find the term sexism
ridiculous. If not, then the only conclusion can be that you *are* a
speciesist who is trying to add value to himself by trying to discredit
the concept behind the term speciesism.
Post a Followup