Other animals are lesser than humans. This is why people think self driving cars who have to crash into either a human or an pet should crash into the latter.
What makes other animals comparable to humans? If you had to choose between a human and a pet dying, which would it be? Could you go up to a holocaust survivor and with a straight face tell them that their suffering is equally bad to a domesticated cow?
Speciesism is not merely plausible; it is essential for right conduct, because those who will not make the morally relevant distinctions among species are almost certain, in consequence, to misapprehend their true obligations.
Other animals are lesser than humans. This is why people think self driving cars who have to crash into either a human or an pet should crash into the latter.
Or a cyclist, obviously.
What is true about those other animals that, if it were true about a human, would also make you consider the human to be lesser?
What makes other animals comparable to humans? If you had to choose between a human and a pet dying, which would it be? Could you go up to a holocaust survivor and with a straight face tell them that their suffering is equally bad to a domesticated cow?
severity is not the only axis of comparison
yes, I think he would be fine with that
Yeah I figured that you couldn’t answer my question. Maybe think on that.
ntt is a fallacious line of argument. it falls prey to the spectrum fallacy.
Sounds like someone who wants to cover up their own speciesism.
speciesism is necessary for correct action.
Edit:
from the wikipedia page on speciesism:
“Correct” as defined by human supremacists. Yuck.
as defined by a professional ethicist.