Is ‘speciesism’ as bad as racism or sexism?

[stfoskey12]

I think comparing speciesism to racism or sexism is silly, because humans of all races and genders have similar levels of intelligence, whereas non-human animals are much stupider than humans. A smart animal may be as smart as a small human child, but that child will grow into an adult much smarter than the animal ever will. While some animals can manage basic language and tool use, we humans are the only ones capable of abstract thought, fire use, etc.

Animal cruelty and abuse are bad, but I don't give non-human animals anywhere near the same moral weight as humans. I do weight pets higher than most animals, but that is largely due to their relationship with humans.

 

[Narz]

I think comparing speciesism to racism or sexism is silly, because humans of all races and genders have similar levels of intelligence, whereas non-human animals are much stupider than humans. A smart animal may be as smart as a small human child, but that child will grow into an adult much smarter than the animal ever will. While some animals can manage basic language and tool use, we humans are the only ones capable of abstract thought, fire use, etc.

Animal cruelty and abuse are bad, but I don't give non-human animals anywhere near the same moral weight as humans. I do weight pets higher than most animals, but that is largely due to their relationship with humans.

Intelligence =/ sensitivity

It could even be argued that bullying someone with an intellectual disability or an sentient animal is more cruel than bullying a very intelligent person as with increased intelligence comes increased understanding (namely that people are dicks, hurt people hurt people, etc) which should in theory anyway, take away some of the sting.

 

[Samson]

non-human animals are much stupider than humans.

I do not accept this. Certainly farm and pet animals are much stupider than humans, but humpback whale song is more complex than human language, and sperm whales have a brain five times the size of ours. We are good at some stuff, like tech, but that does not follow that all others are more stupid.

child will grow into an adult much smarter than the animal ever will

Just to be clear, in the hypothetical poll question this is not the case, the child has no higher brain and will no develop one.

we humans are the only ones capable of abstract thought

Reference required. I think this is unprovable without sci fi mind reading tech.

Just to confirm my understanding of the point, it is allowed to treat creatures differently because they are "stupider", but not because they are a different species. So if it was shown a whale was as intelligent as a human it would be as bad to kill a whale as a human.

 

[Kyriakos]

Any (imo) valid interest in speciesm would, as a first prerequisite, require at least an ability to identify (without doubts/obvious projection, and with considerable understanding) the other being is (at least) as intelligent, give or take, as a human.
But a second, and equally important prerequisite, is that the other species actually has standing of some type. For example, an intelligent alien species would immediately gain such standing, because it comes with its own formed society (in non-romanticized terms; a society comparable to the human one, with established advancements). A whale or dolphin or similar still are peripheral creatures in a planet dominated by humans in all fields that have to do with thinking.
Being part of an exotic group, even if it shows some very prominent traits (you mentioned whale 'language' and brain), still does not imo legitimately bring into question a speciesm, since those beings aren't in any demonstrable way of a level comparable (or higher) to humans.
Humans who lost (or never had) the typical human mental abilities, are still to be treated as humans, for societal reasons. We really do not want to go down the road of not explicitly protecting being human, in law, and that's independent of the obvious lack of equality past the nominal.

 

[Moriarte]

So if it was shown a whale was as intelligent as a human it would be as bad to kill a whale as a human.

I think there's wide agreement that we would rather not kill living beings, regardless of their relative level of intelligence. But meat still is a widely preferred source of concentrated energy. The production and logistics chains are well established and span the planet. Tens of millions of people employed in meat production. Layered on top of that, there is a problem of inequality. Some places, well, quite a few places actually, can't just "become vegan" through "personal choice". They don't have that choice, because they don't have the money to make choices of this caliber, nor availability of alternatives on the shelves. So, eventually, through offering better alternatives (to meat) and raising production levels of said alternatives, we'll be able to move away from killing beings. We will achieve this not through shaming of meat consumers, but though wide proliferation of worthwhile alternatives, preferably over a large stretch of time to give those currently inside meat industries time to realign.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

"Speciesism" is such a silly word; it sounds like it was made up by sheltered middle-classer with little to no understanding of how systematic bigotry works or arises. I'd go as far as to say that the word doesn't actually refer to anything that exists in real life.

What I do believe actually exists, is carnism. Unlike the former word, carnism describes something passive; it describes the latent, universal, basically invisible acceptance of using various animal species for resource extraction. I seriously doubt any human hates other animals simply for not being human, and if you thought that's how racism, sexism, queerphobia, ableism etcetera similarly worked, you are in for a rude awakening. Basically, animal abuse need to be understood as systemic, rather than the fault of "a few bad apples"

This video talks about the phenomenon in great length. The discussion about veganism as a philosophical counterpoint to carnism starts halfway through, but I suggest you watch through the whole thing nonetheless:

 

[amadeus]

I thought hey why don’t we put pigs in a maze and then the smartest pigs will be spared organ harvesting. But then I’m afraid we would just be breeding pigs to be smarter and smarter, and eventually we would have to recognize them as people, or at least farmers if they should ever gain class consciousness.

So now I’m thinking we put the maze up but the first pigs out will be the organ mills. That way we can keep the pigs nice and stupid.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

I thought hey why don’t we put pigs in a maze and then the smartest pigs will be spared organ harvesting. But then I’m afraid we would just be breeding pigs to be smarter and smarter, and eventually we would have to recognize them as people, or at least farmers if they should ever gain class consciousness.

Literally 1984

 

[amadeus]

Literally 1984

Uh… that was a reference to Animal Farm.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

Literally 1984

I was honestly most reminded of the Hunger Games, what with the systematic culling turned into a spectacle

 

[Valka D'Ur]

we humans are the only ones capable of abstract thought,

There have been gorillas capable of abstract thought. One famous example is Koko, who figured out how to combine signs in new ways that her human teachers hadn't taught her, to express certain thoughts she was having.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I thought hey why don’t we put pigs in a maze and then the smartest pigs will be spared organ harvesting. But then I’m afraid we would just be breeding pigs to be smarter and smarter, and eventually we would have to recognize them as people, or at least farmers if they should ever gain class consciousness.

So now I’m thinking we put the maze up but the first pigs out will be the organ mills. That way we can keep the pigs nice and stupid.

Very Maddaddam. The pigoons in that were bred for organ harvesting but after the disaster that befalls humanity escaped pigoons prove first a rival then an ally to humans.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Uh… that was a reference to Animal Farm.

Yes, I am dumb

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

Organ donation should be compulsory.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Organ donation should be compulsory.

There are people here who claim they're withdrawing consent for that due to an anti-vaxxer being denied a transplant because she wouldn't get a covid shot. She had her other shots, but the propaganda is relentless here with people who claim a plethora of catastrophes will befall anyone who gets "the jab."

Funny, I'm triple-vaxxed and am still alive. And after 4+ years of daily glucose tests and insulin shots, needles don't scare me anymore.

I've also discovered that pharmacists are better than nurses at giving shots, for the most part.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Organ donation should be compulsory.

I signed up to be an organ donor, and I am the recepient OF an organ transplant (kidney, in my case), but I would remain 100% AGAINST that. With the consent of the family, sure, (as happened in my case) but the idea that our bodies are just harvestable resources and we can be plundered at will after our death is abhorrent.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

I signed up to be an organ donor, and I am the recepient OF an organ transplant (kidney, in my case), but I would remain 100% AGAINST that. With the consent of the family, sure, (as happened in my case) but the idea that our bodies are just harvestable resources and we can be plundered at will after our death is abhorrent.

Personally I find choosing to withhold a dead relatives body parts due to your feelings, rather than save a life is the barbaric choice.

I'm surprised you're not a hardline campaigner after benefiting in kind.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I'm happy with the policy we have here in Wales. Organ donation isn't compulsory but you have to opt out if you don't want to be a potential donor.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Personally I find choosing to withhold a dead relatives body parts due to your feelings, rather than save a life is the barbaric choice.

I'm surprised you're not a hardline campaigner after benefiting in kind.

I'm a libertarian who believes very strongly in personal choice and self-ownership, as well as the nonagression principle. Treating other people's bodies as a resource to be mined is anathema to me on multiple levels. Organ donation is beautiful when it's voluntary done by a living donor, or when it's done by a deceased person's kin in loving memory of them. Ignoring the consent factor reduces the 'donor' from a person to a bag of spare parts and is abhorrent.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

personal choice and self-ownership

Perhaps I misunderstood, I thought you would support a grieving family to block a donation from someone on the register?