Speciesism

For thousands of years up to the present day humans have viewed animals primarily as a resource. Our evolutionary history has been marked and in many ways driven by the tools and resources we have been able to exploit. Soon after our ancestors developed rudimentary stone tools they were able to shear flesh from animal carcasses. Over a million years ago they began actively hunting and over 7,000 years ago anatomically modern humans developed agriculture. Since this time humanity’s primary interactions with animals have been through agriculture, a system in which animals are utilized and viewed as resources. Having concluded that we are intelligent and special while other animals are stupid and trivial we have proceeded to use, and often abuse, them for our own benefit.

In the past the hunting, raising, and slaughtering of animals for food and other resources was often a necessity and human beings have been apex predators throughout most of our evolutionary history. Little concern was given to the suffering and death of the prey, and later of the livestock, and both the use of animals as resources and the indifference towards their suffering continues today. But what have we learned about animal species other than ourselves that should change the way we have been exploiting them and behaving towards them for millions of years? Is there anything wrong with treating animals as resources or denying them to the right to lives free of pain and suffering?

Due to scientific advances in ethology, neuroethology, and behavioral ecology we now understand that the cognitive differences between humans and many other animal species are not as cut and dry as they once appeared. Primates such as the common chimpanzee and especially the bonobo display complex social systems, tool making, and independent language. Dolphins have been observed to use tools as well and also form social groups as complex as great apes. Many scientists now believe that great apes, dolphins, elephants and possibly other species possess self-awareness. Scientific discoveries regarding what animals are capable of feeling, thinking, and understanding have fundamentally altered the way we view the boundaries of animal cognition, human cognition, and the nature of cognition itself.

In light of this knowledge, domestic pigs and cattle, laboratory rats and primates, circus elephants, and oceanarium cetaceans and pinnipeds are among the many animals that should be regarded as individuals potentially capable of full cognition and treated as such. To deny animals the right to life free of pain and suffering is an act of speciesism, the selective discrimination of species outside of humanity. Anthropocentrism can be blamed for many of the atrocities that have been and are currently being committed against animals across the world and despite the scientific discoveries regarding animal behavior and cognition too many of us continue to view them as resources that deserve little to no rights.

Should the exploitation of animals as livestock, laboratory research subjects, or obligatory entertainers end completely? It seems obvious to me that the raising and slaughter of animals for food will not end in the foreseeable future, despite the fact that the vast majority of wanton animal cruelty takes place in modern agriculture, and outside the First World the utilization of animals as food can still be a necessity, rather than a choice. But it seems equally obvious that the way we in America treat and exploit animals for our own ends must be radically changed. We must accept our ethical responsibilities towards animals and begin the process of ending speciesism.

Blessed are the humanists

When you come from a religious background, ethics are always a significant issue. My background is in Christianity, specifically Protestant, evangelical Christianity, so questions about ethics most often began and ended with scripture. For a Christian the ultimate example of what one must do is found in the person of Jesus. Among the teachings of Jesus found in the New Testament the Beatitudes are arguably the most important, influential, and relevant.

The Beatitudes come from the famous Sermon on the Mount found in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 5 verses 3-12, and are comprised of eight separate statements about eight separate human categories: the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and those persecuted for their righteousness. For each of these Jesus promised a reward, a spiritual vindication. I continue to find the ideology of the the Beatitudes to be both intriguing and inviting. Reward is most often promised to the assertive, the strong-willed, the confident, the aggressive. Jesus promised reward to the meek, the merciful, the peacemakers, the persecuted. In our capitalist, materialistic society the Beatitudes are wholly counterintuitive.

But does this message make any sense in the modern world? Obviously the meek do not inherit the Earth. The discreet and self-effacing do not succeed in a world where selling yourself is the most important part of gaining affluence. Those who mourn are not always comforted. Millions of human beings around the world die alone from a slow, painful death of hunger or disease every day. Was Jesus simply lying to give the less fortunate of the world false hope?

The words of Jesus were a promise that earthly gratification has no connection to lasting gratification in eternity, and for a Christian that promise can bring great comfort. But can the Beatitudes offer anything for a humanist? Can the essentially irreligious glean truth and direction from the theology of Jesus, a man millions consider to be divine?

I do not believe that any attempt made at meekness, mercy, purity, or peace will result in some sort of spiritual reward. I do not believe we will be remembered by a personal deity if we mourn, are persecuted, or hunger and thirst for righteousness. However I do believe that if we try to make peace, if we try to show mercy, if we try to be pure (in a physical, that is dietary, context), if we try to be meeker, then we may make life better for ourselves and those around us. There is a time for bold, assertive discourse, but I feel Americans too often choose the course of loudmouthed, belligerent quarreling. We seem to value our personal needs so highly that any change from the social norm is either resisted or assaulted.

I believe the Beatitudes can serve as an enduring reminder to the religious, undecided, and irreligious alike that our cultural mores are not universal, transcendent truths. We in the free, predominately Christian Occident should be reminded that our culture’s focus on individuality and personal happiness is just that, a cultural focus.

As others have done before me I have taken the words of Jesus and made them my own. Unlike many of them, I have chosen to omit their theological aspects. Can humanists learn useful, informative ethical principles from religion? I believe they can. Religion, as an element of human culture, has both its merits and its faults. If anything I hope the humanists, secularists, irreligious, or those who have disowned their faith background do not reject all the teachings of religion on principle. For myself, the Beatitudes are a superlative example of how many religious teachings can be continually effectual even if fundamental belief has been disavowed.