Anthropocentrism ought to be valued above biocentrism.

I am glad to join this debate as this is a new subject which I want to debate on. C1. Humans are 6uniquely rational. A.Non-Human Animals 7physiology doesn't allow rationality. Well non human animals are obviously different to the degree they can rationalize but I would disagree that all animals cannot rationalize. Quite simply mammals because they share a closer evolutionary link and are biologically closer to us must have some ability to show morality. Mammals have to cooperate in groups form strategies for survival. This requires basic thought and concepts. It may be primitive (not as complex or diverse) but it has to work. A group of wolves have morality because they have to share food, not kill each other, show love and affection to young and other members of the group. So it would be impossible for these groups to survive if they where to competitive amongst themselves and had not concepts of morality. "____Accordingly, Merlin Donald says of the behavior of apes: "complex as it is, [it] seems unreflective, concrete, and situation-bound. Even their uses of signing and their social behavior are immediate, short-term responses to the environment... ...Their lives are lived entirely in the present, as a series of concrete episodes..." (Donald 1991, p. 149) and "...the use of signing by apes is restricted to situations in which the eliciting stimulus, and the reward, are clearly specified and present, or at least very close to the ape at the time of signing" (p. 152). The pushmi-pullyu animal solves only problems posed by immediate perception........ Thus the behavior of non-human animal is completely situation bound and not that of reason. Every goal is achieved through motivation provided by the current needs not of a rational decision or some other mental inclination.______" Ok, well this is well cited but the idea that ape behavior is only conducive to present needs is nonsense. Apes have to build friendships and improve relations with other members of there family. Even cultural traits (culture= traits passed down from generation to generation) such as different ways of opening nuts such as using sticks and twigs to rocks and then simply hands. There is now way that apes could have these primitive cultures if as Merlin thinks is completely in the present. Besides apes are 96% biologically similar, they inhibit many traits of human hunter gatherer tribes. "___If instinct is what purely drives animals to be then rationality obviously doesn't exist for nonhuman animals. By attempting to value Biocentrism above Anthropocentrism the wheels of dehumanizing the human population begin to turn." Oh I am sure icey4321 that could possibly be the case! Now time for the refuting as I believe this is probably one of the most absurd claims from this anthropocentrist yet. You are correct when you say that instinct purely drives animals, because we are ANIMALS! If we weren't then why do we consume and reproduce and share many social and biological traits with mammals. Humans may have a more complex instinct but it is still instinct, as free will does not and has never existed. To have free will an organism would have to be completely isolated from all environmental, evolutionary and biological factors. What is so dehumanizing to accept that you are an animal what so wrong and immoral about that? The only people who accept anthropocentrism probably are creationists christian fundamentalists who want to objectify there views of ignorance over the scientific method which is supported by evidence. http://news.nationalgeographic.com... http://www.livescience.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://en.wikipedia.org...