• PaulWall [he/him]
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 years ago

    our lack of understanding them is precisely why we have the responsibility to advocate for them is my point. that lack of understanding comes from their lack of linguistic capabilities that would allow them to prove they have subjectivity. because they can’t prove it, just like we can’t prove each other has it; we should take the benefit of the doubt and protect all potential subjectivity

    • the_river_cass [she/her]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I have linguistic capabilities. put me in a strange place where no one speaks a language I share and I might well struggle to prove my own subjectivity, especially were that subjectivity doubted by my captors and the burden of proof placed upon me. in fact, we know this because experiments like these were used to "prove" the lack of subjectivity of Africans.

      but again, this is my point about hubris: we regularly assume we know things that we do not, including the lack of subjectivity, or the lack of linguistic capabilities of animals - or, indeed, of other people.

      I think the most unsettling thing about your posts in this thread is the way you've taken white supremacist arguments, changed the subjects to humans and the objects to animals, but left the fundamentally bad reasoning that led to such bullshit wholly intact. humans do not need to be supreme in order for the continuation of our species to be worthwhile - we merely need to be. but we must also extend the same courtesy to the other living things with which we share the globe.

      • PaulWall [he/him]
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        it is factual that humans have superior capacity than the rest of the animals on the planet, it is not factual that white people have superior capacity than brown people.

        • the_river_cass [she/her]
          ·
          4 years ago

          much more important than the factual weakness of a statement like that is why you're so attached to the notion of superiority (whatever that actually means) in the first place.

          • PaulWall [he/him]
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 years ago

            it superiority of our technology and capacities to make technology. the concept of superiority isn’t bad in itself. communism is superior to capitalism no?

            • the_river_cass [she/her]
              ·
              4 years ago

              do you see the difference between a comparison of two economic systems - technologies we choose to employ - and the inherent superiority of one kind of life over another?

              • PaulWall [he/him]
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 years ago

                i said we possess superior capabilities and as su it is our responsibility to protect the planet as it’s so to speak vanguard species. not that absurd given no one is expecting dolphins to solve climate change