What? Some people seriously value animal life above human life?

I personally value human life more than animal life.
However, I think that the stance they take is due to the idea that animals can be seen as more "innocent" than humans. Humans have the ability to be "evil" to some degree, while animals are simply doing what animals do.

I disagree with their point of view because as animals ourselves, any kind of "evil" that we commit is simply because that is what we do.
I value human life over animal life because I understand that a single human has the potential to amount to more in society than most animals ever will.

>>8503106
>valuing """human""" """life"""

I shiggy

>>8503118
It's an internally broken argument. Yeah, animals are incapable of being "evil". Guess what, they also are incapable of being "good" or "kind". They aren't innocent. Being incapable of commiting crime doesn't make you innocent, it disqualifies you from being both innocent and guilty.

File: image.jpg (116KB, 540x545px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 540x545px

>>8503106
Your image doesn't suggest "above". It suggests that people give animal life, some, but not nearly equal, consideration relative to human life.

In any case, though, animals are conscious beings capable of suffering or enjoying. That gives them moral value. How much? Who knows.

Spoiler though:
>not everyone thinks like you.

Science doesnt incorporate values. You're looking for >>>/his/

>>8503134
But the fact that SOME people chose for animals to survive the scenario rather than human beings is just pure stupidity.

>>8503144
It's not stupidity, it's egocentrism. What's a stranger compared to a dog or cat you like? Of course these people aren't saying that their lives and lives of people they like are worth less than animal lives. People they don't like, or don't care about on the other hand...

>>8503147
I assume you can read the minds of everyone who entered values into this game.

File: image.jpg (46KB, 718x588px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 718x588px

Can someone explain the science of comparing the value of human and animal lives?

>>8503144
Sorry, but a dipshit who's drunk driving past a red light while speeding 50km/h above the limit deserves to die in a head-on collision with a wall if it allows my cat to survive.

There are scenarios where the human life is worth less than the animal's, usually when the scenario is caused 100% by the human's conscious fault.

>>8503132
Both humans and animals have the capacity to do great good and great evil. There are plenty of situations where either can do lots of harm or save the day. The difference that a lot of people see between the two is their intent. A "good" person has the ability and right to defend him or herself. A "good" animal will not have the understanding to defend itself, that is what we define as "good" for these animals. Meanwhile, a "bad" human or "bad" animal will both act aggressively whether there is reasonable danger or need to do so. In this way, humans are more intelligent than animals, but in a way we can say that these results occur from the environment where the human or animal was raised. Since pets are easier to raise than other humans (I should say they are easier to raise to be "good") we can only really blame other humans for all the bad. If you think you can blame the animals actions on instinct, then the same can be said about humans, and all the harm that we have done (countless wars) should still put us lower on the moral list than certain animals.

>>8503167
That's not what the scenario was asking.

File: pepe earthquake.gif (1MB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 680x680px

SOME OF JUST HATE YOU FUCKING NORMIES HOW FUCKING DIFFICULT IS IT TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE VALUE ANIMALS OVER YOU EVIL FUCKERS WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT DESTROYING OUR LIVES FUCK YOU ALL REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: 1475776948285.jpg (51KB, 500x285px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x285px

>>8503332
Omega pls

human life should always without exception be put before other beings
>but saving this human will cause the death of million of bacteria!
except this kind of hippie bastards. they need to go to gulag

>>8504177
What if the bacteria are the last of its kind and killing them would wipe out their entire species whereas killing the human would have no noticeable effect on the human population?