717. The Difference Between Animals And Humans
Some people deny, that there is any decisive difference between animals and humans. To me such a claim seems to be made by those in need of an excuse for allowing themselves the behavior of animals in disregard for the consequences.
Some people deny, that there is any decisive difference between animals and humans. To me such a claim seems to be made by those in need of an excuse for allowing themselves the behavior of animals in disregard for the consequences.
The most significant difference is the human ability of memorize sufficient knowledge and experience, which enables only humans for the long term anticipation of the consequences of their behavior. Thus they are capable to recognize the harmful effects of instinctive behavior to an extent, which can lead to the conscious decision against such behavior.
Under natural conditions, at some times animals find plenty of food, at others none. Their instinct to eat as much as possible to store body fat is an evolutionary advantage for survival. Until 10 000 years ago, and sometimes even much later, this was also the case for humans.
Today the reasoning ability enables humans to not always give in to the impulse to eat, because they want to avoid the anticipated consequence of obesity. More precisely, the reasoning supplies the knowledge, but the balance between the power of instinctivity and the counter power of rationality and willpower determine the behavior. Therefore some people are more than others able to keep their weight between healthy limits.
Overfed pets just get fatter and fatter.
It is the same concerning the survival of the species. Animals do not hesitate to copulate, when they are driven by instincts, because they are unable to know, that at some time later, they will be severely punished with the atrocity of giving birth and the burden of raising the offspring.
Only humans are capable to recognize early enough, that the survival of the species and procreation is a form of self-harming for the individual person. The cognitive ability of a considerable number of humans to consciously reject procreation is a very unique trait of humans.
The critical cognitive distance from instincts and the resulting freedom of decision is therefore what makes humans unique. This ability to prevent self-harming comes along with the ability to also know, when the own behaviors cause harm and suffering to others.
When a cat catches a bird and drops it somewhere seriously wounded, the cat lacks any ability to recognize the suffering of the bird. The same holds true too, when animals seriously hurt each other during struggles for the alpha position. Animals cannot know, when the side effect of their instinctive behavior is strong suffering.
Humans can know this. Therefore it cannot be morally justified, that many humans use and consider their cognitive qualities only as a tool serving a more successful application of their instincts. This aggravates the suffering of others instead of avoiding and preventing it. People, who consciously follow their instinct, are knowingly cruel.
This means that the cognitive ability to recognize the consequences of the own behavior brings along the moral obligation to avoid harm and suffering of others as much as of oneself.
Humans can know this. Therefore it cannot be morally justified, that many humans use and consider their cognitive qualities only as a tool serving a more successful application of their instincts. This aggravates the suffering of others instead of avoiding and preventing it. People, who consciously follow their instinct, are knowingly cruel.
This means that the cognitive ability to recognize the consequences of the own behavior brings along the moral obligation to avoid harm and suffering of others as much as of oneself.
Unfortunately, many people live by double standards. When they benefit from using their rational brain, they do it. But when others are concerned, they allow themselves willingly to be ruthlessly determined by instinctive drives.
The same hunter, who during the day shoots animals feeling entitled to do so due to being a human, nevertheless claims in the evening his right to follow his animal nature by copulating like an alley dog with a prostitute, not perceiving the woman as an abused and degraded human being but only as an object. Shooting at humans of another country or ethnic group driven by the ingroup-outgroup instinct, he also has allowed himself to be controlled by an animal instinct, even though his reason could recognize this as absurd, as animal but as certainly not human.
Who feels superior to animals due to being human should also be congruent in not giving in to his own animal urges. Excusing and condoning animal behavior by misrepresenting it as the human nature is not only absurd, but also the consequences are fatal, usually for all parties involved.
The same hunter, who during the day shoots animals feeling entitled to do so due to being a human, nevertheless claims in the evening his right to follow his animal nature by copulating like an alley dog with a prostitute, not perceiving the woman as an abused and degraded human being but only as an object. Shooting at humans of another country or ethnic group driven by the ingroup-outgroup instinct, he also has allowed himself to be controlled by an animal instinct, even though his reason could recognize this as absurd, as animal but as certainly not human.
Who feels superior to animals due to being human should also be congruent in not giving in to his own animal urges. Excusing and condoning animal behavior by misrepresenting it as the human nature is not only absurd, but also the consequences are fatal, usually for all parties involved.
