Reductio argument: humans not infinitely valuable

  • Thread starter Thread starter spencelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dale_M said:
From a Catholic perspective:
  1. The life of a human is infinitely more valuable than an animal.
  2. Therefore, the welfare of a human is more valuable than the welfare of an animal. (NB: I removed the word “infinitely” because unlike life or death, welfare has many shades of gradation.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand your distinction between human life and human welfare. What is the value of human life apart from human welfare?
 
triumphguy said:
A human’s worth stems from his being made in the image and likeness of God. Torturing a puppy is not consistent with a person’s inherent dignity, therefore it is disordered.
Click to expand...
Why’s that inconsistent with a person’s inherent dignity?
 
Nate13 said:
Hmm I think the best way to answer this is to ask you questions and work our way through it. The article does a decent job of answering this though. Can you explain how you believe it could be reasonable for a human to torture a puppy for the purpose of pleasure alone?
Click to expand...
I want to understand why it’s wrong from a Catholic’s perspective, and whether that’s consistent with the view that human life is infinitely more valuable.
 
spencelo said:
Why does torturing a puppy, from a Catholic’s pov, not conform to reason, and what’s the harm to the torturer?
Click to expand...
It is against human reason (not just from a Catholic but from many other points of view) to cause needless harm or destruction to any created thing. Psychologists of all religious and irreligious stripes look carefully at how their patients treat animals, as such is often quite closely related to how they treat humans. One quite strong potential indicator of psychopathy is animal cruelty. An indicator of various other mental illnesses is an undue regard for animals (eg spending so much money on stuff for your pet that you have not enough to afford the necessities of your own life).

The harm to the torturer is the same as the harm done by torturing humans - desensitisation to suffering in animals makes one less sensitive to human suffering too.
 
LilyM said:
It is against human reason (not just from a Catholic but from many other points of view) to cause needless harm or destruction to any created thing. Psychologists of all religious and irreligious stripes look carefully at how their patients treat animals, as such is often quite closely related to how they treat humans. One quite strong potential indicator of psychopathy is animal cruelty. An indicator of various other mental illnesses is an undue regard for animals (eg spending so much money on stuff for your pet that you have not enough to afford the necessities of your own life).

The harm to the torturer is the same as the harm done by torturing humans - desensitisation to suffering in animals makes one less sensitive to human suffering too.
Click to expand...
All this would show is that torturing a dog is wrong only because doing so has bad psychological effects. Suppose it doesn’t–suppose that the torturer is a most gentle soul when it comes to his interactions with fellow humans.
 
Nate13 said:
You asked what about human dignity makes treating animals that way wrong. You have to learn about human dignity to understand that…
Click to expand...
The article only discusses human dignity in the context of human interaction.
 
spencelo said:
I want to understand why it’s wrong from a Catholic’s perspective, and whether that’s consistent with the view that human life is infinitely more valuable.
Click to expand...
We have the ability to reason and do harm to our dignity when we don’t exercise it. We are created in God’s image and likeness and the ability to reason is apart of that. To torture a puppy for fun, is to not act human. How not acting human = goes against human life being infinitely valuable should be self-evident…
 
Nate13 said:
We have the ability to reason and do harm to our dignity when we don’t exercise it. We are created in God’s image and likeness and the ability to reason is apart of that. To torture a puppy for fun, is to not act human. How not acting human = goes against human life being infinitely valuable should be self-evident…
Click to expand...
Okay, so how does torturing a puppy for fun harm **human **dignity?
 
spencelo said:
Having fun is relevant to one’s well-being – well-being includes fun and pleasure-states. When you say that torturing an animal corrupts the soul, what does that mean? What does it mean to corrupt the soul?
Click to expand...
Pleasure is not necessarily relevant to one’s well being in moral terms. In terms of physical health, perhaps, but physical health has nothing to do with the concept of man’s value and well being.

You are trying to discuss concepts which have no logical basis in your worldview, so it is to be expected that you won’t understand them. For example, on the Christian worldview, a person’s suffering may contribute more to their well-being than their pleasure (i.e. suffering can be “redemptive”, or draw one closer to God.)

On the same worldview, torturing an animal (or person) corrupts the soul in that it moves the soul away from love, which is what it was created for. It is an act, I’m sure you would agree, of pure malice. Malice, or hatred, is contrary to love. Malicious behavior divorces the soul from love and, consequently, the source of love, which is God. So while this behavior may afford the individual some fleeting excitement or rush, it will be just that–fleeting–and its pursuance will be just like the junky who continues to shoot up heroin: it feels good temporarily, but it is really destroying him and when the effect wears off, he does it again just to stave off the pain he is really inflicting on himself by doing it to begin with. It’s a vicious and destructive cycle.
 
spencelo said:
Okay, so how does torturing a puppy for fun harm **human **dignity?
Click to expand...
There is this idea called natural law. We believe humans are not created as blank sheets of paper. We have a specific nature. That nature is in the image and likeness of God. Thus not all acts that a human may perform are in conformity with his or her nature. The fact that when a person acts in a way against their nature its wrong is self evident. If you can’t get that, I can’t help you anymore.
 
prodigalson2011 said:
On the same worldview, torturing an animal (or person) corrupts the soul in that it moves the soul away from love, which is what it was created for.
Click to expand...
Does it? Suppose torturing a puppy doesn’t move the soul away from human love–that is, if A tortures a puppy, he wont’ be any less loving towards humans. So how does the act corrupt the soul?
 
Nate13 said:
There is this idea called natural law. We believe humans are not created as blank sheets of paper. We have a specific nature. That nature is in the image and likeness of God. Thus not all acts that a human may perform are in conformity with his or her nature.
Click to expand...
Why is it against a human’s nature to torture a puppy for fun?
 
spencelo said:
I don’t understand your distinction between human life and human welfare. What is the value of human life apart from human welfare?
Click to expand...
Okay, as an example, let us say I am in a small boat in the middle of a large lake, and I can save either a drowning dog or a drowning human, but only one of them. The human life is always more valuable and is always to be saved.

In the case of welfare, let’s talk about a situation which is more real. *Foie gras *is produced by force feeding geese so that their liver becomes fatty. It is unhealthy for the goose and is an abusive practice. The welfare of the goose is greatly harmed. In contrast, the increase in the welfare of a human who enjoys *Foie gras *is marginal. Therefore, the practice is to be condemned.

Human beings do not have a right, according to Catholic teaching, to be indifferent to the suffering of animals.
 
spencelo said:
Does it? Suppose torturing a puppy doesn’t move the soul away from human love–that is, if A tortures a puppy, he wont’ be any less loving towards humans. So how does the act corrupt the soul?
Click to expand...
It moves his soul away from the love of GOD. His feelings for humans is not the ultimate measure of his love. A person does not receive his soul or his value/dignity from other people. He receives it from God.

Again, you are trying to discuss spiritual matters from a materialistic worldview. If you want to understand it, you need to make an effort to learn the basics of theistic philosophy.
 
spencelo said:
Why’s that inconsistent with a person’s inherent dignity?
Click to expand...
Does God torture?

However, torturing a puppy is also NOT like raising animals for food.

Ya know: we can be superior, yet treat other beings with dignity, as well as use them properly for our benefit.
 
Dale_M said:
Okay, as an example, let us say I am in a small boat in the middle of a large lake, and I can save either a drowning dog or a drowning human, but only one of them. The human life is always more valuable and is always to be saved.

In the case of welfare, let’s talk about a situation which is more real. *Foie gras *is produced by force feeding geese so that their liver becomes fatty. It is unhealthy for the goose and is an abusive practice. The welfare of the goose is greatly harmed. In contrast, the increase in the welfare of a human who enjoys *Foie gras *is marginal.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure your example captures the distinction between the value of human life and human welfare. Suppose the human in your example is in a permanent coma–and thus unconscious–and will die in 1 hour in his sleep anyway if saved. The dog, on the other hand, will enjoy at least 10 more years of life. Would you still save the human?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top