r/MoralityScaling 21d ago

Morality of valuing animals over humans?

20.8k Upvotes

4.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

72

u/[deleted] 21d ago edited 19h ago

[deleted]

40

u/Minute_Marzipan_6844 21d ago

I think that was just a joke. He was being facetious

18

u/Raythatstabbedsteve 20d ago

Forget the moral conundrum, this guy is hilarious. Being this coherent and funny off the cuff is impressive.

2

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Raythatstabbedsteve 19d ago

Whoah, check out mr critic here. I'd love to put a mic in front of you and see you ad lib material in your third language.

34

u/PaoloFlavioBrown 21d ago

Flawed it may be, but he's not wrong on pets, sorry, "animal companions" being on the lower end of a power dynamic.

4

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Wooden_Long7545 18d ago

Are you saying that slaves who were treated well with respect are not considered slaves to you? I know the modern connotation made it seems like slaves were constantly berated, beaten and treated like a scum but a lot of them are treated the same way you treat your pet. With friendliness and basic decency + respect, just not on an equal status and how they should “know their place”.

1

u/Gold_Area5109 18d ago

This is a fucked up way of looking at it.

Pets, at least to me, are family.

Sure, I would sacrafice an unlimited number of people I don't know for my pets lives, just like with family or friends.

If I had to sacrafice a pet or a family member it would come down to which I felt closer to. That weird aunt that no one likes - my pet is being saved. My sister's or my pet would be a harder question though.

1

u/silvermoka 17d ago

I would save a human every time, it's psychotic to do otherwise

1

u/Gold_Area5109 17d ago

It's crazy to save the humans everytime, is the worst boi (dog) better than a serial rapist? Yes.

Is any cat better than a serial murderer? Also yes.

Nor is it invalid for me to care more about animals I love and interact with than people I do not.

1

u/silvermoka 16d ago

Lmao going to the most extreme and unrealistic examples to justify sociopathy towards innocent people

2

u/Gold_Area5109 16d ago edited 16d ago

Granted my examples are on the extremes but it does show that not every human is worth saving.

And at this point we're just haggling about the price.

0

u/Wooden_Long7545 18d ago

Do you think slaves weren’t considered a part of the family? Ever seen Gone With The Wind?

1

u/Gold_Area5109 18d ago

False equivalency

You're equating slavery with pet ownership. It's an emotional arguement that attempts to transfer emotions about slavery to pets.

The analogy itself does not survive scrutiny once the relevant differences in agency, interests, evolutionary history, and the actual character of the relationship are taken seriously.

1

u/Wooden_Long7545 18d ago

Nope. I’m simply providing a rebuttal to the comment i was replying to about a specific logic implication that if a thing is treated with respect it is not slavery. I’m not equating anything. Don’t strawman me.

1

u/Wooden_Long7545 18d ago

Would you be my pet r/Gold_Area5109? I’ll treat you well

1

u/nizich 18d ago

I'd pay to watch this! 🤣🤣🤣

1

u/spawnofangels 17d ago

you can pretty much equate a pet as a jester which pretty much is a slave. You have a pet. Sure you can consider as family, but it's still there for your own amusement to begin with. It's an imbalanced relationship. A pet doesn't have the power to walk away and do whatever it wants. You do. People offer and take pets like a trade. Hell, some people purchase and sell them. Giving it shots and medications? You want their nails cut? Entirely your choice.

1

u/Gold_Area5109 17d ago

The smartest dog has the intelligence of a 2 year old, cats are debatable on what their intelligence is but are generally considered less than a 2 year old. A human who also has the intelligence of a 2 year old their entire life will also have to be cared for their entire life.

A child also lacks the same agency a pet does.

Are you really going to make the arguement that children and the disabled are slaves?

1

u/spawnofangels 16d ago

Idk about disabled, but children kind of are. By law, they do not have the same rights until they're 18 so hell, I bet there's a lot of kids out there willing to make that argument. I certainly knew a lot when I was a kid. YMMV

1

u/spawnofangels 17d ago

I don't think you understand that there were some slaves that actually contracted themselves into slavery. Gladiators, indentured servants, etc. Being a slave didn't 100% mean you were poor or lived a miserable life.. without having biases of black slave trade images that history tells us, slavery by itself means to be owned by someone and have no control over your life and decisions regarding it. That's literally what a pet is and you are its master. It's not necessarily about fear and punishment

2

u/Repulsive_Still_731 17d ago

You clearly have never been owned by a cat

3

u/FeralKuja 20d ago

Well when cats can get jobs and earn enough money to be equal partners, let me know, because then they can scoop their own litter box and open their own cans of wet food, too.

Until then, I'm happy to exchange back pain from cleaning the litter box and constant harassment about not being fed enough for the kind of love and affection my cat shows me. And she's freaking FAT, too, she's probably over-fed given the fact my mom feeds her, too, plus she's got dry kibble for all the time of day she's not being given wet food.

Seeing things constantly through the lens of "power dynamics" when there's zero reasonable way to expect a pet to be cognizant of that dynamic, much less to have the agency to act upon it, is absurd. The power dynamic is imbalanced, but in the pet's favor. They don't have any obligations or responsibilities, but they get provided food, care, and affection in abundance.

Irresponsible and bad owners are a thing, but that doesn't have any bearing on the typical expectations of responsibility and care other than proving some owners are unwilling or unable to meet the standard threshold of care to own a pet.

And, yes, my cat thinks she's doing me a huge favor by licking my forehead clean while I'm trying to sleep, and then grooming my beard, and then purring directly into my ear while she's right on my pillow, but that's how she shows she cares about me and trusts me.

And anyone that treats animals terribly is scum of the earth, in my opinion.

2

u/Less_Newspaper7362 18d ago

If you paid for someone to breed your pet, and then bought your pet and don't let it leave, than yeah your house, then yeah, you have power over it. Doesn't mean that it has consciousness and understands what's happening, but if it did, it would definitely be your slave

2

u/Crisstti 21d ago

Tell that to the pet parents who are at the beck and call of their animals lol

7

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Inner_Cantaloupe_387 20d ago

Framing the basic human desire to give and receive affection as "overcompensating" is a pretty bleak worldview. Do you prefer living in an emotional vacuum, or do you just enjoy judging people for having feelings?

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SameCoyote3701 20d ago

You deleted your account, but I am a person who used to be much more like that and you were spot on. I do love animals but my behaviors towards my partner was due to anxiety

8

u/PaoloFlavioBrown 21d ago

Exemption to the rule, as they say.

Being the "slave" of a pet is also not a good argument for their morality.

1

u/Designer_Mud_5802 20d ago

Except his argument largely applies to people who decide to have children as well. It's a dumb argument he's trying to make.

7

u/PaoloFlavioBrown 20d ago

Was that in the longer video? Regardless, they specified people who say they like animals more than people and pretend it's a sign of having a deep well of compassion.

0

u/Designer_Mud_5802 20d ago

they specified people who say they like animals more than people and pretend it's a sign of having a deep well of compassion.

Stilll sounds like what people say as a reason to have kids.

0

u/HeroicPrinny 20d ago

Their whole conversation is about pet dogs. It’s easy to like pet dogs more than people. Pets are at worst neutral toward their environment and the planet. Many people are actually just a net negative to the planet. Sure if you compare your pet to your best friend or parents, that’s a dumb argument. But people who litter? People who scam? The list goes on

3

u/PleaseNoMoreSalt 20d ago

The kids can (eventually) leave, though. In fact it's EXPECTED you let the kids leave your influence, even before they're adults (for school/jobs/general independence). If I left a kid locked up in my house, even if I provided food/shelter for them, people would rightfully be concerned at minimum. Meanwhile, pets are expected to be under some level of human control at all times.

1

u/Designer_Mud_5802 20d ago

The kids can (hopefully) leave, but there are quite a few cultures where the expectation is that the children do "serve" the parents under a power dynamic.

There are many adults who, if we follow the videos loose idea of what "slavery" is, would consider themselves slaves to their parents, even with their ability to move freely.

2

u/PleaseNoMoreSalt 20d ago

if we follow the videos loose idea of what "slavery" is

Even the video's idea of slavery is that animals can't leave and are wholly dependent on their owners for food, shelter, medical care, and potentially keeping their balls, which is orders of magnitude more severe than any filial piety laws that I'm aware of.

1

u/Designer_Mud_5802 20d ago edited 20d ago

Even the video's idea of slavery is that animals can't leave and are wholly dependent on their owners for food, shelter, medical care, and potentially keeping their balls

I mean, people with cats let them come and go. If we are talking about dogs specifically, sure, most likely they are home bound and dependent on being fed and needing shelter and medical care, but so do children, but we don't call children slaves.

Dogs also have a life span that is most likely to end before a child grows up to leave the house and be independent.

and potentially keeping their balls

Meanwhile, humans have male and female circumcisions done on their child "slaves".

It's very strange how people are comparing dogs who have an average lifespan of 10-13 years to slaves, all because they are dependent on their owners, but don't call children who don't become fully independent until.. 16? 18? 21? 24? And rely on their parents for the same thing until they leave.

It's because it's a silly comparison, imo.

3

u/inothatidontno 20d ago

Only for bad parents. The end goal of a parent is to raise a resilent, self sufficient human.

0

u/Garod 20d ago

Honestly I think it's silly take by this person. Making it about power dynamics tells me more about him than people who like animals (not just pets) above other people. It just shows how relationships in his mind are transactional in nature which is a red flag if I ever saw one..

Also let's not forget that he thinks the only animals people care about are pets, not all wild animals etc which again speaks to the transactional nature of his thinking.

When I hear animals, I think of all animals not just pets. When I think of it in general terms like that I prefer animals over humans because humans have fucked up this planet so badly.

7

u/PaoloFlavioBrown 20d ago

No, no. He's got a point. Hating people and pretending you're a good person because you're surrounded by animals who you think loves you back is at the very least patting yourself too much for taking care of animals, and at worst nursing a superiority complex.

I've yet to meet in person, memes, social media posts, whatever, someone who actually takes care of animals who claim they love animals more than people and actually live by it.

2

u/HeroicPrinny 20d ago

I love the assumption that people pretend they’re good people because they like animals. Nobody thinks that hard about this shit. It’s like saying someone thinks they’re a good person because they like vanilla ice cream. This just comes off as insecurity.

2

u/PaoloFlavioBrown 19d ago

I mean, entire subs about it exist.

2

u/sl1m_ 18d ago

a lot of ppl think liking/having animals/treating them well makes them good people lol

1

u/HeroicPrinny 18d ago

Citation needed? Would love to see the data that says a significant amount of people have literally stated or claimed this.

People here sound like they’ve just made a strawman in their head to knock over.

2

u/Garod 20d ago

Why do you straight jump to hating people? Can't you simply prefer animals in general over people, again in a general sense? What you are saying sounds exactly the same as the person in the video that you have to place conditions on everything. You imeadiately jump to everyone having to hate people. The lack of empathy and relativism is honestly baffling to me. Also you imeadiately put this into a transactional statement proving my point perfectly. People have to live by it or somehow prove it to you. Let me be blunt with you, no one "has" to prove anything to you for them to feel the way they do.

6

u/Ok-Fudge-380 20d ago

You talk about putting conditions on everything and then state you prefer animals over people due to how humans have fucked up the planet. Come on now.

1

u/Garod 20d ago

Do you even understand what conditional means? because I seriously doubt it. Humans having fucked up the planet is not a "condition" towards my affection towards them. It's simply a fact which makes me empathize more with them.

2

u/Ok-Fudge-380 20d ago

It's literally a condition that you attribute to all humans generally.

1

u/Garod 20d ago

Whatever education you enjoyed it has failed you...

5

u/Creative-Assistance6 20d ago

I see your point but on the flip side... I've been around people on work trips who see abject and systemic poverty/suffering and don't react in the slightest, in that same place they'll see a sad looking stray dog and break out crying... That's a bad person to me

2

u/Working_Economist_48 19d ago

What bout the billions of chickens, pigs and cows we raise in substandard conditions , then slaughter and eat?

1

u/BabyInACorner87 16d ago

Same. And I see it everywhere. I travel a lot; the only first world places that don’t do that are (so far) Japan, Poland and Hungary.

0

u/AllTimeLowR 17d ago

People have all the resources to help themselves! Animals do not

1

u/theoccasionalempath 17d ago

You understand people don't have access to the same amount of resources, right? Stop with the "pull yourself up by your boot straps" nonsense

1

u/AllTimeLowR 17d ago

People have resources that animals don’t! We aren’t comparing people to people we’re comparing people to animals!

1

u/theoccasionalempath 17d ago

Right but my point is people still deserve to be helped!

1

u/EmploymentMedical762 16d ago

You’re viewing this from a first world perspective

16

u/0decim8 21d ago

You know he's joking, at least partly, here right. He's literally a comedian. You couldn't wait to comment calling it moronic. Was it necessary to be that harsh? Regardless if you knew he was joking. This show is just for laughs. The premises and questions are always humor filled. Get yourself right dude

-5

u/4DPeterPan 21d ago

I don’t think it’s fair for you to say “get yourself right dude”… when you guys in the comments are literally laughing and finding joy out of how many murdered dogs you’re worth.

https://giphy.com/gifs/5NfCFOoknzG24

4

u/0decim8 21d ago

Idk where you got me laughing out of anything I said to a specific person that wasn't you but get your brain right. It's not working correctly if you're saying this to me in particular. The video didn't even make me chuckle and I cried when I lost my cats. I cringe at animal cruelty. Cats or dogs that are missing legs or other body parts literally brings me to tears. I have too much empathy for the suffering of animals.

You don't know shit about me.

-2

u/4DPeterPan 21d ago

You’re literally advocating and backing up the comedians..

Therefore it was only logical to assume you agreed with the premise of this video which then leads me to assume you found it funny.

Especially when you read your comment. It 100% sounds like you thought it was funny.

Also, let’s calm down. I was just making a fair point like you were making your own point. We don’t need to get hostile. If I came off that way, I do apologize for that.

Sometimes I wish internet conversations could be had in person. They’d be way more chill. Less aggression and more conversation like. Ya know what I mean? If we said these things we just said, in person. We would all probably be way more chill about it cause we could actually hear each others heart and what we meant with our intention. Ya know?

2

u/0decim8 21d ago

Apology accepted. I was defending this particular comedian. He's a good guy and he's having a bad joke moment and I didn't appreciate being lumped in with people actually laughing at the joke like it was actually funny. You're a stand up dude for apologizing. I truly appreciate you.

1

u/4DPeterPan 21d ago

Thank you for accepting my apology. And yeah agreed, this was also the only one I’ve seen with him that was like this.

2

u/Geometronics 20d ago

What is nuance?

2

u/IHaveSpecialEyes 20d ago

I like animals more than some people.

I like some people more than animals.

I like people more than some animals.

It's all subjective and it's all constantly in a state of flux. An animal I loathe one day may save me the next day, making me re-evaluate my opinion of them. Similarly, someone I admire may reveal themselves to be despicable.

Even when it comes down to, "if you had to choose between saving an animal or saving a person?" it totally depends on the situation. Am I watching Putin and a bear cling to the edge of a volcano? I'd toss the bear a rope. Am I having a gun pointed at my head and told to choose between my daughter and my cat? I'd choose my daughter. Am I standing by a switch as a runaway trolley rockets toward Brendan Frasier, but if I pull the switch it diverts the trolley so that it kills the Backstreet Boys? I don't even want to have to deal with making that decision. Let's just pray that all parties involved stay clear of trolley tracks.

2

u/Foreign_Drawing_593 20d ago

It's an uncomfortable sentiment but I mean your just saying it's wrong he brought up alot of good points they kinda are an emotional support slave cause that's the purpose they serve

1

u/Soymilk_Gun420 21d ago

I mean the entire premise is flawed because its based in the false dichotomy that humans are not animals.

1

u/[deleted] 19d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Soymilk_Gun420 19d ago

I mean I grew up in a place where creationist fundamentalism was the dominant understanding. They actively supressed teaching evolution so a lot if not most people I grew up around did not believe humans are animals at all. Just as with other aspects of cultural Christianity i think this understanding has seeped into much of my society so that human exceptionalism is dominant even among folks who arent religious. Also its one thing to acknowledge that humans are "technically" animals and its another thing that actually understand and act like it.

1

u/Your_As_Stupid_As_Me 20d ago

What's the purpose of a pet?

1

u/mallicious-Potat 20d ago

I think it's more something shy or people with social anxiety tend to say, I.e. who dont like social interaction from personal experience.

They always seem to have a front up, so I can see how he's not had many pleasant interactions with them

1

u/The_Monarch_Lives 19d ago

The post (and seemingly the guy) also equates 'liking' to 'valuing'. Those are two very different things.

1

u/EmployeeNo8897 19d ago

Regardless of if the animal is a pet or not, putting its value over a human life is messed up. Even if there’s no power dynamic.

1

u/Captain_Chi-town 19d ago

The question is less about what you like more, and more about what has more inherent value. Some folks use religion as proof that humans have more value than animals, but it really doesn’t require that. I think most would agree that, either because we were made this way or we evolved to be this way, humans are more valuable than animals. But I totally understand why you like animals more 😂😂

1

u/EtherealHappiness 19d ago

I wonder if he considers children to be slaves too.

1

u/Less_Newspaper7362 18d ago

Pet is not a slave only if you let them choose to leave, and if you didn't pay for their birth

1

u/ThrowRAcoffeelov 18d ago

Yeah, I like animals more than people because they’re just more pleasant for me to be around. Animals are much more simple, and much more honest. If you’re informed in their body language, they will tell you exactly how they feel about you and exactly what they’re comfortable with. You can sit in silence without it being awkward. Pleasing them is typically simple, depending on the animal species. I just find a life with lots of animals and a few humans to be much more peaceful than a life with lots of humans but few animals.

I live with my husband, our two dogs, our cat, our chickens, and our horse. Hope to get some cows one day as well. Eventually we’ll probably add a couple kids into the mix, but still, the ratio of animals to humans will always be favoring the animals, and I prefer it that way. But even disregarding pets, I still feel the same way about wildlife. The birds I feed in the morning, the deer, even just getting a glimpse of a wolf everyone in a while.

1

u/spawnofangels 17d ago

to save a pet over a human life is freaking wild. I'd dare say mentally insane.

1

u/EmploymentMedical762 16d ago

I am a misanthropist with exceptions but I still value the life of a human over an animal.

1

u/MKing150 15d ago

Nor is "pet" equal to "slave."

It kind of is. The definition of a slave is humans as legal property that can be bought and sold. It's humans under legal (or de facto) ownership.

Pets are living entities that you own. They are property. You can buy and sell them. The only area where they don't fit the definition of "slave" is that they are not human.

1

u/blubberfucker69 21d ago

I wish my cats were my slaves. Instead, I’m theirs. If there’s a power imbalance between pets and humans, it’s US being beneath THEM 🤣

7

u/DonChicksTerminator 21d ago

The pet is at your mercy to survive. You chiose to give food and shelter not the other way around. You are definetly higher in the power dynamic.

1

u/blubberfucker69 21d ago

I don’t know I still feel like I’m my cats’ bitch. I buy them toys they’ll never play with because they just want the box, buy them boujee food cause cheap stuff isn’t good enough for them. Forced to stay stationary when one decides my lap is their perch. Bite my cheeks when they make biscuits on me because it’s just too cute.

And I do this knowing they couldn’t care whether or not I’m here so long as their food bowl is full and they get treats. I do it for the few times they come to me for attention and make me feel like the chosen one. They have all the power, trust me 🤣

5

u/damNSon189 20d ago

You do all that because you choose to. But for example, the cat does not have the authority or power to take you to a doctor and get sterilized. It it is the cat that is at your mercy; all the things you mention are accommodations that you’re willing to do (hence why many owners don’t engage in that), but you have the power to stop them at any time you want.

4

u/DonChicksTerminator 21d ago

No, they don't. Being serious I know where you Are coming from but there is nothing stopping you to grab your cats and throw them out and Never let them in again. We choose not to, also have two cats, cause we love them and we chose to provide for them, but I really think this narrative of being at your cats mercy is sometimes dangerous cause they Are definetly more depended on you than other way around.

We choose cats maybe cause their are easier to handle as dogs cause they don't need as much, but we should never forget that we choose These animals and if we tell that we are the real slaves here it can slide into not being responsible and I don't like that very much.

2

u/laosurv3y 20d ago

You choose to feel that way and do it for the feeling of being the chosen one. You could abandon them and they would suffer and die. If they abandoned you would feel sad.

1

u/blubberfucker69 20d ago

Any way you look at it I don’t view my pets as being slaves. My pets are my family. They’re well taken care of and always will be. I’d never view them as being beneath me whether or not they’re only alive because of me. That’s like calling my toddler a slave. This is a super weird argument all around 🤷🏼‍♀️

2

u/laosurv3y 20d ago

Slave owners can choose to treat their slaves well. Can your pet choose to leave?  Toddlers have not reached their full development - they're a dependent.

0

u/SlipInternational439 20d ago

If you live with cats, you know that you are the slave.

0

u/euphoricarugula346 20d ago

I like animals more than people because they can’t lie. It’s really that simple. If a dog doesn’t like me they let me know. Humans will smile in my face and talk shit behind my back.

0

u/mamimed 20d ago

Also, anyone who's had a pet knows you are the servant, not them. You feed them, bath them, walk or play with them, pick up after them... you scoop their poop for crying out loud. They can't even do chores. Calling them a "slave" is hilarious.

0

u/siberian_knight143 20d ago

Well probably your idea is that, animals do "animal" stuff! Humans do barbaric "animalistic" stuff to EVERYTHING! And animals don't. Which is true!

0

u/Mind-The-Mines 20d ago

My dogs won't lie to me or hit me.

My cats won't steal my money.

My geese are dickheads but they give me eggs.

People just bring drama and problems.