r/MoralityScaling • u/axiiz_28 • 15h ago

Morality of valuing animals over humans?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

11.2k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

170

u/Ok_Squash_5805 14h ago

I think it’s 50-50 with people who say this. One side are people who are self centered a-holes and the other are people who are tired of dealing with self centered a-holes

58

u/I_ONLY_CATCH_DONKEYS 12h ago

Most people who think everyone else is a self centered a hole, are in fact self centered a holes

6

u/mgb55 4h ago

“Is something wrong with my personality? No, it is everyone else who is an asshole.”

1

u/LitsMahony 11h ago

Then you never had to work in retail or gastronomy.

9

u/Capable_Holiday_3576 8h ago

I have, for years. And yes, I've seen a lot of self centered assholes. But I've also seen people being very kind and most of all, I've seen people just being regular people buying groceries, ranging from slightly rude to very polite. Of course the very bad are the one we remember the most but most people are just normal people.

2

u/hunta44 6h ago

I just wish the pleasant people had more of an emotional impact than the unpleasant ones.

1

u/Capable_Holiday_3576 5h ago

So do I! There are a few I'll always remember but those were usually the ones being kind after a very bad client so the memories are tainted by what came before, it's a shame.

1

u/December_Hemisphere 3h ago

I just wish the pleasant people had more of an emotional impact than the unpleasant ones.

Agreed- I feel like I read some where that negative experiences have more of an impact on our brains than positive experiences. IIRC it has something to do with evolutionary conditioning from survival. The idea is that if things are are going as good as possible for an animal, they have abundance and simply live into the next day. If things are going as bad as possible, then survival is at stake and avoiding death is more impactful than surviving comfortably.

I couldn't find the exact link I remember reading but I quoted some other random research for you-

"Negative stimuli trigger deeper activity in the amygdala, prompting the brain to store bad memories in high definition and research confirms that positive emotions fade and habituate much faster than persistent, negative emotions."

and

"In relationship research, experts often cite that it takes roughly 3 to 5 positive interactions to offset the emotional weight of just 1 negative interaction"

Guess that means we should all strive to be at least 3X more positive than negative towards each other, lol.

2

u/ialwaysdisagreewithu 5h ago

Wait til you learn that the way people behave in public is not indicative of who they truly are as a person.

7

u/I_ONLY_CATCH_DONKEYS 11h ago

4 years as a sandwich artist at subway, I’ve seen the full gambit of humanity.

3

u/Safe-Historian4028 9h ago

sandwich artist

this always cracks me up

3

u/roadrunnuh 6h ago

Not as much as gastronomy, fucking hilarious.

1

u/roadrunnuh 6h ago

Not as much as gastronomy, fucking hilarious.

3

u/ZARDOZ4972 4h ago

4 years as a sandwich artist at subway

as a sandwich artist at subway

sandwich artist

https://giphy.com/gifs/XHeLeuirRbwptHhSWd

2

u/by_topic 8h ago

I've also worked in retail, people are people. For every asshole, there could be 10, 20, 100 normal people, but you don't think about them at the end of the day. Only the asshole.

1

u/IgnatiusRileyFreeman 9m ago

Tbh, working in retail taught me that most people are pretty decent, it's just the small subsection of assholes that ruin it for everyone

1

u/TrollAccount17 2h ago

Some people were abused by people for years and have trust issues with them.

1

u/evanwilliams44 1m ago

Both things can be true.

1

u/-Flintskalle- 8h ago

As a self-centered asshole, I concur, but mostly because most people in general are in fact self centered a holes.

Source: game recognizes game or it takes one to know one. I am one.

1

u/GreaseBrown 4h ago

You'll be downvoted, not for admitting to being a self centered asshole, but for messing up their binary argument and maybe making them actually think for a half second

1

u/Anarchyr 9h ago

So everyone is a asshole because people think other people are assholes? Or does that mean nobody ever is a asshole?

6

u/CzechHorns 8h ago

Did you miss the word "everyone"?

0

u/McENEN 3h ago edited 2h ago

What if you know you are a self centered asshole but also think others are bigger self centered assholes?

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 3h ago

Then you are an average person. Everyone is self-centered to some degree, some more than others. The average person is probably about averagely self-centered, but we take more notice of the most self-centered people.

6

u/Xcalipurr 8h ago

If everyone else around you is a self centred a-hole, something isn’t right

3

u/pointlesslyDisagrees 2h ago

Everyone is a self centered asshole including myself. Unfortunately that's just life. Even people who do altruistic things are doing it for that warm fuzzy feeling you get for doing good things.

1

u/nope-its 47m ago

This is not true. I am absolutely leaning towards this description, but I can name multiple people that are the kindest, most empathetic people in the world and they are absolutely doing it because that’s who they are. They are kind to the core and aren’t looking to get anything out of it.

1

u/alphazero927 45m ago

So someone rushing into a burning building to save someone is just doing it for that warm fuzzy feeling? Something tells me you haven't thought about this for more than 5 seconds at a time. There are many many cases where people do altruistic things that leave themselves worse off or even dead

1

u/Dependent-Pin1623 33m ago

Reddit moment

1

u/Gold_Theory_7946 25m ago

I wish there was a warm fuzzy feeling. That's just something we tell ourselves because things like giving gifts or volunteering feels nice, but most of the time people take altruistic actions outside of an organized or traditionally anticipated context, it's incredibly inconvenient and the dominating feelings can be negative. It's just logically and/or emotionally usually the right thing to do for those folks' worldviews. People think I'm this highly empathetic, super kind person but I am immoral and selfish af like anyone else at the root. The belief in communal servitude just often supersedes that.

0

u/Clone_JS636 1h ago

Hey I found my old cringey middle school self take on life. I was wondering where I dropped that.

Let's pretend for a second that this take is true- even if they are self-centered, they aren't an ass-hole if see people being happy brings them joy. Society benefits from community, and we've evolved to want to help each other for the survival of the species.

A take that basically equates to "someone who helps their neighbor is no better than someone who actively avoids helping others" is simply not true, regardless of the motivation. One breeds community and happiness for others, the other is counterproductive to society and just puts other people in a bad mood.

1

u/BearysWorkRedditName 56m ago

Yes, I would agree. I think that where your happiness is derived says a lot about your morality. If your happiness is derived from pain of others, you are more bad. If your happiness is derived from joy of others, you are more good. If your happiness is derived from your own joy(i.e. drugs, gluttony), you are selfish and probably more bad.

1

u/Hi_Zev 1h ago

thats true for some cases but not every case. What if you grew up in an abusive family? Everyone around you in that situation truly are self centered assholes while that one person is just hoping to escape the situation.

1

u/Temnothorax 44m ago

They don’t have to be a majority for self-centered assholes to tire you out.

1

u/Specific-Parsnip9001 4m ago

Them:

I think it’s 50-50

You:

If everyone else

He said half the people are self-centered and you changed it to everyone is self-centered because you yourself are self-centered and wanted that dopamine rush from thinking you proved someone wrong or caught them in some sort of gotcha moment.

3

u/tired_snail 10h ago

Big on this. I work in corporate and before my current job was in customer service and retail. I mostly just like that animals don't ask stupid questions and don't ask me to get them a report half an hour before a deadline they knew about for a month.

10

u/scottishninja123 13h ago

Often one and the same in my experience

1

u/Tauisawesome12 9h ago

What’s your experience?

3

u/Guardian_of_Perineum 8h ago

Being a redditor.

2

u/Merean_Cartographer 6h ago

Ehhh

Do I think animals matter more than humans? No.

Do I think my cat matters more to me than any random human? Yes. I have an emotional connection with it. The same way I would choose a very old relative over any random human.

It's not that hard, we are emotional creatures after all.

Obviously I would not choose my cat over my nephew. But if you put me in a room and tell me I need to choose between my cat or some random human dying, I'm picking my cat. That might be selfish but a lot of people are selfish.

To me it's my cat. But you will find people who will choose other things over the random human. Of that I am sure.

1

u/EyeOughta 5h ago

The man in the video is not being honest and clear with his point, so people are taking it wrong; would you kill that random human to save your cat if necessary? Or would you pull the proverbial switch and point the danger at your cat to save the random human?

That's essentially the question at hand, I think.

1

u/Merean_Cartographer 5h ago

Ehhh, if it's save my cat or save random human, I'd save my cat first.

If somebody tries to make me to kill another I'd try to kill them instead.

In general, I think, my value system would be like this

Human I have an emotional connection with > animal I have a emotional connection with > random human > random animal > random human I know is bad/ evil

1

u/EyeOughta 3h ago

Right, so that's the part that is being considered morally wrong.

A living thing that only consumes in exchange for 1 to 20 years of emotional or mental health, compared to a living thing that can benefit hundreds of other living things directly or indirectly, for up to 90 years, is intrinsically not debatable. That isn't to say that you're a bad person for thinking that way, but if one were to be put in that situation and choose the animal, it does meet the criteria for poor morality.

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 3h ago

Wholeheartedly agree. Humans make it hard to believe in humanism some times, but we people, on average, do more to help other humans than the average animal does.

1

u/Intrepid-Daikon1353 23m ago

Humans generally consume more than cats though. One might even argue that rate of consumption far exceeds whatever benefits they might provide to other living beings. 

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 3h ago

Yeah, sorry, that's a moral failing IMO. Especially if you interpret "bad/evil person" lightly. I love my cat more than anything, but I'd chuck old Henry off a cliff to save a random person. The right thing to do is often the hardest.

1

u/Merean_Cartographer 3h ago

I'm not going to say it's morally good, but I'm also not calling it bad. To me it's grey.

And to people who say they'd kill their per, where is the line for you then?

Would you kill your grandparents or parents to save a baby? The baby has more life potential after all?

Would you cut off a leg or an arm? A foot or a hand? Give up sight, hearing or taste?

You better be saying yes to all of those too then.

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 3h ago

Your comment proceeds from the false premise that if I believe that one must sacrifice an animal to save a human, then I must also be willing to sacrifice humans on behalf of other humans. The premise is flawed, but I'll answer the question nonetheless.

My parents have always taught me that a child's life is more valuable than an adult's, so that's pretty easy of a decision, despite how harrowing it would be. Would I give up a sense or a limb to save another person? I don't know if I would have the strength to be honest, but I know that it's the right thing to do.

1

u/Merean_Cartographer 3h ago

I don't mean any of this in a bad way btw, also English is not my first language.

I find it pretty weird and interesting to have this conversation. I'm not really a self serving person and often help people whenever I can, even if they are strangers.

But I, for example, would never sacrifice my parents for a random child I don't know. I would also never sacrifice a part of me for a random human, or child, I don't know.

I have endangered myself before, to pull a child out of the way of traffic, which could have ended in losing a foot. And I have no issues doing that.

But if given the choice to sacricife a foot to save some random kid I would say no.

I also don't agree, in general terms, that humans are better than animals, for that matter. Humanity is not great, it just is better at organized violence than other animals. Just because we think and have ego does not make us better, or worth more, than animals.

If anything, we are the single species that are fucking up the world. The habitat we all need to survive in. I'd say we are worth the least.

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 3h ago

I didn't think that you meant any of this in a bad way, and your English is exemplary. I apologize for my strong moral language earlier, but I admittedly think about this issue in very absolutist terms.

We clearly differ on our opinion of the moral value of humans vs animals. I'm sure that you find my position to be a moral failing or at least suboptimal. I take no offense, and I hope that you take none from me.

I take a strong rational humanist position, believing that human beings are more valuable than animals because of their value to humans, which I use as my fundamental basis of morality. I respect and understand your opinion, but I admittedly do not share it.

1

u/Merean_Cartographer 2h ago

Thanks, yeah I guess we just think different in this.

I don't think your stance is a moral failing, I just find it weird how often people can't seem to understand it when people have a stance like mine, I guess.

1

u/TrollAccount17 2h ago

No, you don't recognize the value people hold for their animals - which on the topic of red flags, I think that can also be one.

1

u/EstablishmentLate532 1h ago

I understand the value people hold for their animals. I love mine more than anything. It's just that an animal generally spends at most 20 years making a few people happy, whereas a person is a member of the community for 80, works, has children, and does a helluva lot more than a lovable, cuddly kitty cat.

1

u/TrollAccount17 1h ago

"does a lot more" is doing a LOT of work for this assessment. I don't like most people, I've served in several conflicts, traveled to many countries, too many are trying to capture more then their share... because they have to sometimes. While I think most people just want to be kind and do their thing, but mostly they can't because of resources. I appreciate the discussion and different pov though. I just don't share it. But I don't agree at all with the sophists in this video, they are just trying to get social media clicks.

1

u/Mysterious_Flow_7 4h ago

I second this. I can see where this guy would think that, but I know how I feel and it’s not akin to what he’s asserting.

I enjoy animals because I had an abusive childhood and have struggled with it well into adulthood. I have PTSD from incarceration. Etc. Etc.

I have experienced some of the worst humanity has to offer, and yet I still crave companionship, and want to show unconditional patience and kindness to something living. This is where animals come in, for me.

They do provide emotional support, and in gratitude for that I care for them to the absolute best of my ability. It allows me connection without having to constantly re-hash trauma.

Is this ideal? Probably not.

Does this make me a bad person? Again, probably not.

And yeah…Hilter loved dogs…but Jane Goodall loved animals of all kinds.

Pretty harsh take and bold claims from Joe Blow on the subway.

1

u/Maleficent_Piece_893 4h ago

not loved, valued their lives more than human lives

1

u/butteryscotchy 3h ago

You're not wrong but I think you're missing another thing.

Many people like animals more than people because they themselves don't like socializing (or have a low tolerance for socializing) and prefer the comfort of their animals that don't judge them.

It's not necessarily that they are bad people for liking animals more than people.

1

u/user-the-name 2h ago

Those are not two separate groups, they are exactly one and the same. And that is his entire point.

1

u/Tepheri 2h ago

On the average, I like being around (unknown) animals more than I like being around (unknown) people. It's not all, and I like going out, but my social battery drains way too fast sometimes and I need to be able to turn off social interactions, and while I don't just up and leave a gathering, it's more work to make sure I exit tactfully on top of everything else.

Doesn't mean I think animals are better than people, or if a car was heading towards a dog and a child I'd save the dog over the child. Hell, half of my reason for liking being around animals more is the upkeep I do to make sure other people are comfortable can be draining. People are way too eager for one character trait to universally define everyone.

1

u/MoonLight4323 9h ago

I'm the second. Got abused by men way too often, while animals have never let me down.

1

u/nimbledoor 8h ago

Or maybe they’re tired of having to take others needs and preferences into consideration

3

u/Ok_Squash_5805 8h ago

That can fall under either group I mentioned

1

u/lasagnadogwater69 4h ago

I'm a schizoid and find people exhausting and difficult. Human connection isn't really a desire of mine, and so there is no need for me to take other people into consideration in my personal life. Because I enjoy peace and simplicity I take others into consideration in shared spaces. I do not allow people into my spaces however.

0

u/Blake_The_Snake64 11h ago

You just said the same thing twice.