Anthropocentrism versus Biocentrism.

Thank you for responding. "To whom is human life most important to?" - It is indeed true that human life is the most important thing for humanity (as you have stated), as for humans to live, there must be other humans to take our place. This is mostly cyclical logic, and it should be obvious that humans can't survive if they die. Therefore, our very existence on this planet is the reason why we are most important when regarding humanity itself. I'm not sure if you worded your sentence wrong, but I think that this is a pretty clear fact. If there were no humans, there would be no need for humanity. I still stand when I say that human life is more important than anything, subjective or quantitatively. We answer to ourselves only. When earthquakes occur, who do we blame? Do we rely and depend upon mother Nature when every major disaster strikes? When problems occur, we humans find the sole solutions. That is why so many other species are extinct, because they don't regard themselves as important. Mortality is a fundamental aspect of humanity. We are afraid of death. Are animals? Are they able to form a clear picture of who they are and what they want to be in life? Animals don't have goals (correct me if I'm wrong). They seek no purpose in life other than to survive and breed. Humans, on the other hand, are magnificent creatures. We not only survive, we advance. This is why we're at the top of the food chain. As for your notion of the grandeur of the cosmos being far more than a human could ever achieve: humans have the potential for greatness. The cosmos do not. Now, if you are Christian or a theist, you should try to see it the way God does. If you are an Atheist, like me, just continue on. God created the universe (for all you Christians out there). God is the single most significant thing in our lives. That being said, whom did God give free will? Do animals know that there is a God? Do they practice and worship religion the way us humans do? It is stated in scripture that humans were modelled thereafter God. Therefore, we rank much higher in terms of significance, at least in God's case. While Everything is regarded as being created by God, yet we were the first to appear in this world (Adam & Eve). Therefore, your argument regarding the cosmos, planets, universe, etc. have no merit if you believe in God. Now, if you don't believe in God, Anthropomorphism is still the favorable choice. You say that all of humanity is bound through its similarities. I agree, as race is a man-made thing. But, without race, would we still be bound to our similarities? Look at what happened during the U.S. several decades ago. Blacks had less right, less equality, they were almost treated as animals. Would you say that humanity still bounds our similarities together? Species should and must treat each other with equality if they were to remain species, or else speciation would occur. We did not treat our fellow dark-skinned humans with that same equality. Thus, we advanced, in a cruel and sinister since. Now, do you realize how well off the majority of America's citizens are? Blacks now have more rights than they did before, and the White population will no longer be the majority of births as predicted by 2011. Equality is great, but if a species must evolve, equality cannot have a place. The germ theory and Newton's theories of classical mechanics, they are all man-made discoveries. Do you think animals have any idea what the germ theory is? We manipulated and used the knowledge of germs and disease to our advantage, now modern medicine is more potent than ever before. Can animals vaccinate themselves, do they have clinical hospitals? Animals die needlessly because they have no idea what technology is. I do not want to say that is the destiny of every non-human, but sadly, it is, unless we HUMANS choose to HELP them. We can interfere, or we can sit back and watch. Also, when I said that the homo sapien species is the only species you can safely remove from this planet, et. cetera, I meant that our species is so strong than the removal of humans would disturb the natural balance of nature. Let's look at this in a more philosophical approach. Do you think the Earth would continue to "evolve" if humans were not present? Of course! Humans are the only exception to the rate of evolution, as I previously mentioned, natural selection is now drifting towards artificial selection. Removing humans from this planet would seem as highly beneficial, yet highly detrimental. It all depends on how you look at it. I regard humans as the superior race. We came, we saw, we conquered. Humans may not be the only species with the ability to lie, but we are sure the best at it. Who do you think invented lying? Well, you could say Satan if you are a theist, or you could say we invented lying. The universe does not lie, it provides. Also, your argument is partially flawed, as humans share 99% similar DNA with monkeys. After all, from which animal did we evolve from? Arguments for Anthropomorphism, depending on your religious views: 1. There are uncountable trillions of different ways the Universe could have turned out. 2. It happens to have turned out in just a way that will support human life. 3. The chances of this happening spontaneously without intelligent intervention are extremely small. 4. Therefore God probably took a hand in the creation of this Universe. 5. Therefore God probably favors us. 1. There are uncountable trillions of different ways the Universe could have turned out. 2. It happens to have turned out in just a way that will support human life. 3. The chances of this happening spontaneously to other species are extremely small. 4. Therefore humans are most likely the rulers of the universe, by incremental logic. 5. Therefore humans are probably the single most significant being in this universe. I look forward to this debate too, as it is my first.