When we, humans, use ourselves as a measuring stick against which everything else in world is evaluated, then an anthropomorphic image of sentience and intelligence comes to govern our ethics. True: the life of plants resembles our living patterns to a lesser extent than the life of animals. But to use this as a cornerstone of ethics and a justification for rejecting the moral claim plants have on us is a case of extreme speciesism.That's right: "speciesism." You not only can't wear furs, but now you have to be nice to plants. We're all related way back, after all.
Rocks for dinner anyone?
HT: 3 Quarks Daily
3 comments:
Do we believe in "equality" or don't we?
At the risk of offending our fluffy brothers, Martin, I don't cotton to such remarks.
Ooops, I said the 'c' word. The next step is to remove all traces of anti-plantism from our vocabulary. Such epithets as "corny", "seedy", "pulpy", "flowery", "fruity" are hereby banned.
We're going to have to change the name of some diseases because they cast certain plant species in an unjustly negative light. E.g., the term 'tuberculosis' is flagrantly offensive to those of our friends whose only crime is to have thick, starchy roots.
While we're at it, bacteria have as much right to your body tissues as you do. Please curb your immunological defenses.
Lee,
The immune system is just a bunch of xenophobes.
Post a Comment